PEPE herd ae 


a ¥ 
WIE 7, Charlee 
PFDA IY, ah eins 
EF ROP LEA EATS 


iS. ce 
eo te Hie, 
oe Ae 


a 


7, a ie 
Y ay J. 
iG Hes 
Vi uy? oye NY 


on 
. 


Nanay! 


ty, 


= es 


A vf , 


Baath er ae pL PONG 
pe owt Ff ORF f: 
» " “aS 


SS as rans 


ST wee Nj . 


Ci | 
te a7 i GN > 
2 ‘A . 


Pa CRE eer 


Sy She 


Ss 
oot ee 





DAR 1204192 in 
“Ky cy 
Soin, sew 









: 


NE 


i 


(, 
A 


J i 
TA 
MN 
{ A » 

iy 
fy 
) 








Christ in the Four Gospels 







Wie Oe 

JAN 12 Wes | 
%, $ 
Logon. sew 





BY 


tas 
Rev. Joun H. Caste, B. A. 
Instructor at the Misstonary Training Institute, 
Nyack, N. Y. 


CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE PUBLISHING CO., 
260 West 4aath Street, New York, N. Y. 


Copyright, 1926 


CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE PUBLISHING Co. 


Printed in the United States of America. 


Dedicated 
to my beloved Students 
past and present 





CONTENTS 


Pages 
Introduction—Inter-Testament Period ......... 1-6 
Preparation for and Private Life of Christ ...... 9-49 
Beginning of the Ministry of Christ ........... 53-73 
Farly Judean Ministry of Christ .............. 77-91 
Early Galilean Ministry of Christ ............ 95-127 
Later Galilean Ministry of Christ ............. 131-209 
Latest Galilean Ministry of Christ ............. 213-234 
dictroneneiatry Of CUUSE Lo. i elsisisiejein ce vale aia 237-280 
A TM CORE sai 5650. a8 nce ine 9 iauecstasi # pales haya olen 280-345 
ON eo, val, eee eas chara kn rs 349-366 


Indexes 


ere) « 


if 

4 ey] ; 
By es 
eae Ch@ rie iy 

in } 


Nes | 
ane 








PREFACE 


Solomon interrupts the grand closing chapter of Eccle- 
siates to say “Of making many books there is no end.” In 
spite of this oft quoted truism new books bid for recognition. 
Fach has its occasion, its object, and usually its unique place. 
Solomon’s observation was intended to direct the young to 
his own “Words of the wise” which “are as goads (to prod) 
and as nails (to fasten).” Said he, “By these, my son, be 
admonished.’’ He warned against the distracting “many 
books” and the distressing “much study” with its attendant 
weariness, Nevertheless he considered his own latest book, 
written in his old age, doubtless, to be indispensable. Not 
every writer can honestly make such a claim for his humble 
contribution to the “many books.” So I have no fear of 
being charged with an affected modesty when I state that 
it is with a degree of hesitancy that I submit this “Life of 
Christ” for publication. 

The occasion of the bringing together of the material com- 
prising this book was the teaching of the ‘““Harmony of the 
Gospels.” In presenting this course I used the same method 
as my scholarly and saintly predecessor, Dr. Henri De Vries. 
Lectures required “notes.’”’ And these piled up until they 
had became bulky and too cumbersome, for permanent 
use. Their cost in mimeograph form was well nigh pro- 
hibitive, yet necessary. So each succeeding class of students 
called for all this “in a book.” Therefore my primary 
object in publishing these “notes” is to satisfy this demand 
of my appreciative and stimulating students. 

However I have hope that others may be instructed and 
edified by the contents of the following pages, studied in 
conjunction with the Four Gospels. To secure the most 
satisfactory results “A Harmony of the Gospels” by Stevens 
and Burton (Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York) should 
be used with this work. I hereby recognize my obligation 
to this commonly accepted “Harmony.” Its outline I have 
followed. It was indispensable in our class-room work. 

vii 


viii PREFACE 


The teachings of Christ afford a mine of inexhaustible 
wealth. Though He spake in no cryptic terms yet, after 
nineteen centuries, the last word in the exegesis of His 
utterances has not been spoken or written. We, therefore, 
share the digging in this mine. Then matters geographical, 
historical and illustrative are introduced to provide a suit- 
able background on the one hand or to give color to the 
composite picture of Christ on the other. 

Many authorities have been consulted and quoted, often 
at what might appear undue length. But why not gather 
boquets from others’ gardens and tie them with one’s own 
string? As frequent quotation shows “The Life and Times 
of Jesus, the Messiah” by Edersheim was ever at hand. 
Geike, Farrar, Simpson, Blaikie, Seely, Papini, Wilson and 
scores of others have placed the author under obligation by 
the merit of their works. 

From the New Testament, English and Greek, I have 
harvested; from others I have gleaned. Share my store. 


Joun H. Caste. 


Nyack oN js 
Aug, 27, 1926. 





Christ in the Four Gospels 


INTRODUCTION 
INTER-TESTAMENT PERIOD 


The silence of four hundred years between the Old Testa- 
ment record and that of the New is broken only by Josephus, 
the Apocrypha, and notices of Greek and Latin historians. 
(Josephus, a Jew born at Jerusalem A. D. 37, in A. D. 93 
published in “Greek Antiquities of the Jew,’ a complete 
history from creation. His ‘The History of the Jewish 
War” gives an account of the nation from B. C. 170 to his 
own time. Josephus exaggerated to make his nation seem 
great. The Apocryphal Books cannot be placed in the canon 
of Scripture yet they contain considerable valuable informa- 
tion. ) 

These four centuries witnessed the fall of Persia, the 
rise and fall of Greece or Macedonia, and the rise of Rome. 
These three great world empires are of interest to us as 
Bible scholars because they so intimately touched Jewish 
life and were potent factors in making Jewish history. 
Daniel, both by the Image of the Man, as seen by Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and also by the recording of his own Beast 
Visions predicted as well as described these empires. (See 
Dan. 2:31, 32; 33 and context; 7: 1-23.) 

Professor Blaikie in his Manual of Bible History divides 
the history of Palestine into six sections, “corresponding to 
the different masters whose sway it owned.” 

1. The Persians were its nominal masters to the year B. 
rs a fe 

2. Alexander the Great conquered it in that year and was 
its master for ten years. 

3. On his death (B. C. 323) it fell, after a long contest, 
under the Ptolemys, or Macedonian kings of Egypt, and so 


remained for over 100 years to B. C. 204. 
1 


on INTRODUCTION 


4. Then it came under the Macedonian kingdom of Syria, 
till it was set free by the Maccabees, B. C. 163. 


5. Ruled by the Maccabees for another century, till —. 


6. The Roman general Pompey conquered it (B. C. 63), 
and made it tributary to Rome. 


Time would not permit, nor is it within the scope of this 
course to cover the rule of Persia, Greece, Egypt, Syria, or 
even the Maccabees, over Palestine. However the two last 
we shall roughly sketch. Alexander’s successors in Syria 
and Egypt, kings of ‘the north” and “the south” of Daniel 
11, recognized in Palestine and Coele-Syria a bone of con- 
tention. Finally in the Battle of Raphia, near Gaza, 
Ptolemy conquered Antiochus and resolved to visit the holy 
of holies in the temple after the battle. He withstood the 
high priest who resisted his encroachment upon the sanc- 
tuary, but is said to have been seized with confusion and 
terror, and so retreated and abandoned his purpose. 

Ptolemy was then enraged at the Jews and upon his re- 
turn to Alexandria persecuted them severely. Having re- 
solved to make a spectacle of them, he assembled Jews from 
all parts of Egypt into the hippodrome, made elephants 
drunk with wine mingled with frankincense, and turned 
them upon the Jews, but the brutes vented their rage upon 
the unhappy spectators, killing many of them. ‘Then the 
king, alarmed at God’s interposition for the Jews, recalled 
his persecuting edicts. He soon died, leaving an infant of 
five years as his successor. Antiochus of Syria embraced 
the opportunity to seize Palestine. Later he was murdered. 

We pass to the “dark and troubled era’”—the reign of 
Antiochus Epiphanes. Epiphanes means “Illustrious” but, 
says Blaikie, he “was illustrious only for the grossness of 
his character and the wickedness of his conduct.” He 
wrested the office of high priest from Onias and gave it to 
his unprincipled brother Jason for 360 talents. Upon hear- 
ing that the Jews rejoiced over a false report of his death, 
he slew 40,000 of them and sold a like number as slaves. 
He showed his contempt for the Jewish religion by enter- 
ing the holy of holies, sacrificing a sow on the altar of 
burnt offering and sprinkling broth made from its flesh all 


INTRODUCTION 3 


over the building. When later aggravated he had men 
slaughtered in their synagogues, carried women and chil- 
dren off as slaves and demolished Jerusalem. This put an 
end to Jewish sacrifices for three and a half years, or until 
Judas Maccabeus recovered and purged the temple. 

Antiochus Epiphanes proscribed the Jewish Faith. “The 
temple at Jerusalem was forcibly consecrated to the Grecian 
Jove and the statue of Jupiter Olympus was erected on the 
altar of burnt offering.” Women and the children which 
they had circumcised were cast headlong over the city walls. 
Jews were forced to participate in the abominations of the 
feast of Bacchus. Thus Antiochus aimed to eradicate the 
Jewish faith. 

But God always has His man ready for the emergency. 
A family of the priestly class called Asmonzans or Mac- 
cabees stemmed the tide of blasphemous tyranny. Mac- 
cabees is said to have been derived from the initials of the 
words which comprised the motto which Judas, one of the 
family, placed on his standard; Ex. 15:11, ‘““Who is like 
unto thee among the gods, O Lord?’ In Hebrew MI 
CAMOKA BAELIM JEHOVAH; from M C BI was 
derived the name. Matthias, the father, and five sons 
shared the same spirit of unwillingness to submit to pagan 
worship. Collecting an army of like-minded persons, Mat- 
thias retired to the mountains of Judea and from the caves 
occupied by David 1,000 years before, bade defiance to 
Antiochus. The Jews resolved to resist even on Sabbath. 

Martyrdom was preferred to death by those who were 
Maccabean in spirit. Ejleazer, a principal scribe, suffered 
torture and death rather than eat swine’s flesh. A mother 
and her seven sons were commanded to eat the same de- 
tested food. Rather than comply each successively had his 
tongue cut out, his fingers and toes removed and was cast 
into a large vessel on a fire. The valiant mother was the 
last to suffer this horrible fate, but not until she had spurred 
on her sons to faithfulness by words of exhortation and 
cheer. 

The temple was cleansed and rededicated and services 
resumed. 

But Judas was beset again by the Syrians and so he ap- 


4 INTRODUCTION 


pealed to Rome. Pompey, of the first Triumvirate, took 
the city when opposed by Aristobulus, a Maccabean de- 
scendant. Pompey unwisely entered the holy of holies of 
the temple, and so outraged the feelings of the Jews. 
Hyrcanus, a Maccabean, was given the government of 
Judea but denied the crown. 


This was a stormy time in the city of David the Great 
King. Religion was at a low ebb. Sadducees opposed 
Pharisees on the matter of traditions. Says Blaikie, “Now, 
as formerly, true piety probably flourished like the ferns 
and the mosses of our mountains, in shady nooks and in 
lonely dells. Little of it can be discovered in the leaders 
of factions, or in any of the men who occupied prominent 
positions. The rose of Sharon and the lily of the valley 
must be sought for in more quiet and sequestered spots.”’ 


Roman Influence 


When Pompey was killed in Egypt, Cesar, who ruled the 
empire alone, made Hyrcanus king at Jerusalem, but he ap- 
pointed Antipater, an Idumzan, procurator of Judea under 
Hyrcanus. Antipater’s two sons, Phaselus and Herod 
(afterwards the Great) were made governors of Judea and 
Galilee. Antipater was poisoned the next year. Julius 
Cesar was assassinated three years later. 


Herod’s Rise 


The new triumvirs were Octavius, Antony and Lepidus. 
Antony received Syria and the East. Antony favored 
Herod. Phaselus died. Herod married Marianna, the 
beautiful granddaughter of Hyrcanus, the Maccabean. 
About this time Antigonus, son of Aristobulus, had the ears 
of Hyrcanus cut off so that he could not serve as high priest. 
Herod then went to Rome and persuaded Antony to give 
him the office and dignity of king. Antigonus was put to 
death and the Maccabean rule with him ceased forever. 

Herod is described as “crafty, clever and cruel.” He 
busied himself destroying all of those related to the Mac- 
cabees lest one of them would seize his throne. Aristobulus, 
brother of his wife, was invited to his residence at Jericho 


INTRODUCTION 5 


where while bathing he was choked to death by one of 
Herod’s officers holding his head under the water in pre- 
tence of sport. Then Hyrcanus was inveigled to go to Je- 
rusalem, where he was put to death in his eightieth year. 
Then Marianne, his wife, alienated from Herod by the un- 
timely death of her male relatives, fell under suspicion and 
was executed by her unconscionable husband’s orders. Then 
Herod grew remorseful, more and more cruel, suspicious 
and vindictive and left a bloody murderous record. 


Herod, unpopular with the Jews because he was an Idu- 
mean (descendent of Esau-Edom) and on account of his 
trail of blood, resolved to win their favor by material im- 
provements. So he built an amphitheater and a theater for 
the amusement of the people at Jerusalem. Samaria he re- 
built. On Mount Zion he erected a magnificent palace for 
himself. He built a great seaport, Czesarea. His chief im- 
provement was the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem. 
Fle had incurred Jewish displeasure by building a temple of 
white marble in honor of Cesar Augustus at Peneas at the 
sources of the Jordan. Hence the rebuilding of the temple 
of the Jews was a politic move. ‘The second temple had 
stood about 500 years and so time and sieges had worsted 
it. Jewish mistrust of Herod made it necessary to arrange 
for all the materials being on the ground before the old 
temple was torn down. There were employed 1,000 wagons, 
10,000 workmen and 1,000 priests skilled in architecture. 
In ten years the temple was dedicated, but many men were 
employed for years afterwards, giving grounds for the re- 
mark of the Jews, “Forty and six years was the temple in 
building.” 

After this Herod, overcome again by suspicion, had his 
two sons strangled. Many others suspected of conspiracy 
were put to death. When we recount how cheaply Herod 
held human life we quite well understand his wholesale 
murder of all the babes of Bethlehem in order to get rid of 
the infant Jesus. 

Yet all this monstrous conduct of Herod and all other 
vicissitudes of Israel did not “alter their religious views or 
shake their confidence.” Israel had weathered other storms 
besides that of Herod, Had they not passed through 


6 INTRODUCTION 


Egypt? Had they not broken through the impious heathen- 
ish straits of Antiochus Epiphanes? 

(Note: Page 1 of the second set of notes to be studied 
here. ) 


PART [ 
The Thirty Years of Private Life 


yar at 
# i Luv iff 


P i Ne ai 
i ad ue ai ie 


a : 
o + ‘ ik 





THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 
§1. Prologue of John’s Gospel. John 1: 1-18. 


This section strictly speaking is not a part of the narra- 
tive of Christ’s earthly life. Apparently John wished to 
oppose false ideas of God and “the uniqueness and all-suf- 
ficiency of the revelation of God in Christ.” False concep- 
tions of God’s relation to the world made it likely that some 
would be led away from faith in Christ as Mediator between 
God and man. ‘The theory of the inherent evil of matter 
caused many to believe that God never created it nor could 
He have anything to do with it directly but only through 
intermediate being or beings. A favorite name for these in- 
termediate beings was “Word.” 

Those most likely to succumb to this false teaching were 
the Jews of the Western dispersion who had become Hel- 
lenized or Grecianized. These Jews revered a life of lofty 
thought and study of the law, but did not believe they could 
attain unto it. It was sacred, but like the soil of Palestine 
unattainable. In the West Greek ideas were “in the air.” 
Greek intellect penetrated everywhere, and the Jews came 
under its sway. Doubtless the Jew was proud of his own 
community and satisfied by it, but the leaven of Greek think- 
ing Hellenized all about it. Hellenic criticism could not be 
silenced, nor its searching light extinguished by the breath 
of a Rabbi. He must argue. And why not, since he had 
truth on his side? But it was a truth of authority. He had 
not “thought it out.” In the process he had to encounter 
the questions of his own mind as he “meditated” and pene- 
trated into the Divine mysteries. Hence the Jew gave at- 
tention to the intellectual view of the Scriptures—their 
philosophical understanding in the light of Grecian thought 
and criticism. ‘They looked for depths beneath the surface 
scripture text. There was a tendency to divest the stories 
of the Old Testament of their nationalistic garb, to “ideal- 
ize the individualism of the persons introduced” and hence 
have truth for all times and peoples. These Grecianized 

9 


10 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Jews believed that truth was truth regardless of its source 
and so granted that heathen sages were God-taught or that 
inspiration was of degree rather than of kind. Their 
“mental consciousness” answered to intellectual truth just 
as “conscience answered to moral truth or duty.’’ Added 
to this was the influence of the “time-spirit,’ which rules 
thinking and doing. Curiosity had been aroused and Greek 
learning was sought in spite of bans and prohibitions. “A 
young Rabbi, Ben Dama, asked his uncle whether he might 
not study Greek philosophy since he had mastered the ‘law’ 
... the older replied by a reference to Joshua 1: 8, ‘Go seek 
what is the hour which is neither of the day nor of the 
night, and in it thou mayest study Greek philosophy.’ ”’ Yet 
the Jewish Patriarch, Gamaliel II, studied Greek though the 
elder Gamaliel felt so keenly the wrong of possessing a 
Targum on Job in Aramzan that he buried it deep under- 
ground. ‘To offset the tendency a ban was pronounced on 
all who studied “Greek wisdom.”’ Yet in spite of this sus- 
picion of all that was Greek, that language inevitably found 
a prominent place among Jewish peoples. Translation was 
made of the Pentateuch under the patronage of Ptolemy II, 
who was said to be “literally book mad,” so keen was he for 
literature. Naturally the other books of the Old Testament 
were translated successively and evidently the LXX was 
completed while Ptolemy III reigned (247 to 221 B. C.). 
The LXX was in the language of the people, and 
it was urged that it was inspired like the original, just as 
some people of our day insist on the inerrancy of the King 
James’ version. Asa matter of fact the LXX was colored 
by Greek thought. 

In order to understand what John was guarding against 
in his prologue let us briefly consider “‘the greatest of un- 
_ inspired Jewish writers of old.” For thus Edersheim de- 
scribes Philo, the wealthy aristocratic Jew of Alexandria, 
who “‘completed Jewish Hellenism.” He it was who com- 
bined heathen philosophy and the Jewish faith. 

Philo was saturated with classical modes of expression 
and both alludes to and quotes scores of Greek writers. He 
was familiar with Homer, Heslod, Pindar, Solon, Plato and 
others, and scarcely could think of Pythagoras, Plato, Aris- 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 11 


totle and the Stoics as “heathen.” ‘To him Plato was “the 
great.” Yet above all these he placed Moses, from whom 
he believed all sages had learned. But much was found 


-under the holy Scriptures rather than in them. He recog- 


nized both a literal and an allegorical interpretation. The 
Biblical personages were indeed historical characters yet, to 
him, “the allegorical interpretation gave the true sense, even 
though it might occasionally run counter to the letter.” 
Thus “the killing of the Egyptian by Moses, represented the 
subjugation of passion, etc.” 

Philo set aside the literal meaning of the Scripture when 
it implied anything unworthy of the Deity. Since he be- 
lieved in the separation of God and matter he accounted for 
miracles and interpositions by sometimes allegorizing and 
again rationistically explaining them. He could not admit 
of any direct contact between God and creation. So he com- 
pleted his system by resorting to emanations from God. He 
had ‘‘Potencies’”’ (dynameis), “Words” (logoi), as inter- 
mediate powers. ‘They were Potencies when thought of as 
the power of God. They were Words when considered as 
expressing God to and through His creation. Strange yet 
true it is that although Philo conceived of the “Word” as 
helping him to reconcile his system of Jewish faith and 
Greek philosophy yet his definition of “Word” is not clear, 
as Edersheim in his scholarly way shows. When we con- 
sider the ‘Preparation of the Ancient World for Christian- 
ity” we observe that Heathenism prepared “philosophically” 
for Christ’s Coming by demonstrating that the human mind 
was utterly unable to solve the problems of the universe and 
life. Before the phenomena of nature man stood baffled. 
The Greek attempted a solution. But he was keen rather 
than deep. His sounding line was too short. His telescope 
was not suited to the far-reaching problems all around him. 
Yet he ventured and drew some conclusions. These results 
were taken seriously by Philo and others and attempts were 
made to reconcile them with revelation. But the ass and the 
ox did not make good yoke-fellows. Oil and water did not 
mix. Philo’s ‘Word’ was meaningless because it desig- 
nated nothing real. John in his prologue tells of a real 
“Word.” 


12 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


John takes the term used by Philo and puts a new mean- 
ing into it. There is the same form but a new substance. 
“God is not afar off, unrecognizable by man, without prop- 
erties, without name. He isthe Father. Instead of a nebu- 
lous reflection of the Deity we have the Person of the 
Logos; not a Logos with the two potencies of goodness and 
power, but full of grace and truth. . . . John strikes the pen 
through Alexandrianism when he lays it down as the funda- 
mental fact of New Testament history that ‘the Logos was 
made flesh’ just as Paul does when he proclaims the great 
mystery of ‘God manifest in the flesh.’ ” 

Philo and his school were “feeling after God if haply they 
might find HIM.” John showed them God in Christ. 

Campbell Morgan has given a well wrought out and 
most suggestive outline for John’s Prologue. I submit it 
with other appropriate matter recognizing where I quote: 


I.—John 1:1 
1. “No man hath seen God.” 
a. In the beginning was the Word. 


b. The Word was with God. 
c. The Word was God. 


IJ.—John 1: 14 
2. “Son hath declared Him.” 
a. The Word became flesh. 


b. The Word dwelt among us. 
c. The Word was full of grace and truth. 


IlI]—John 1:18 


“IT” speaks of the eternal, heavenly, divine ‘‘Word” as 
identical with God. 

“II” speaks of that same “Word” coming to earth in- 
carnate and as being completely satisfying and real. 

“IIT” sums up or briefly states “I” and “II.” God be- 
yond the vision of man has been brought to “plain view” 
by Jesus. 

Dr. Brooke Foss Westcott in his “An Introduction to 
the Study of the Gospels,” p. 17, says: “The history of 
Christ is concrete doctrine, as doctrine is abstract history. 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 13 


The Christian finds in the records of the Lord’s life a per- 
fect pattern for his own guidance as well as the realization 
of the Apostolic Teaching.” This says two things; viz., 
that Christ made concrete, or wrote, in terms that man can 
understand, the will of God (the mind, thought or ideals 
of God), and that man can find in a study of Christ’s life 
a standard of his own, as the apostles taught. Herein we 
see a practical advantage in studying the Gospels, the story 
of that matchless life. Herein we see an attainable life, an 
ideal life. Says Westcott further, “The fundamental error 
of the most pious of the ancient philosophers lay in their 
misapprehension of the relation of the finite to the infinite. 
They sought a system of absolute truth, independent of the 
specific laws of human life and vainly labored to raise men 
out of the world. They had no gospel for the simple and 
poor, for the mechanic and the slave... . They cherished 
and set forth one part of man’s nature to the destruction 
of the others... Christ . . . fixed the idea of spiritual 
life in the harmonious combination of faith and works, and 
left His disciples in the world though not of it.” Christ 
came to reveal God to man as well as to manifest a case of 
God being in man. He “dwelt among us... full of grace 
and truth.” He exemplified a satisfactory life. He com- 
bined all the elements of the divine and the human, the in- 
finite and the finite. His was a revelation of what God 
intended in man, filled with His spirit. He showed reality. 


§2. Preface of Luke’s Gospel. Luke 1: 1-4. 


Luke, the writer of the third Gospel, gives us the portrait 
of the Lord Jesus as a man. He reveals His humanity and 
His sympathy. He shows in Christ what Tennyson ex- 
pressed in his well-known couplet— 

“Thou seemest human and divine, 
The highest, holiest manhood thou.” 

As Matthew wrote to and for the Jews, and Mark the 
Romans, so Luke wrote to and for the benefit of the Greeks, 
who conceived their mission to be that of perfecting man. 
It is well known that the Greeks carried this so far that 
they worshipped man. Luke portrayed to them One who 
was worthy of their worship. 


14 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Of Luke Salltau says, “Very little is known of him.” 
He is generally supposed to have been a Gentile by birth, 
and therefore a “proselyte of the gate.” He is mentioned 
in only three places, namely, Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:11, and 
Philemon 24. The first mention of his connection with the 
Apostle Paul is indicated in Acts 16:10 by the use of the 
word “we.” 

Eusebius says that he was probably a Greek born at 
Antioch, educated in Greek literature and medicine, a phy- 
sician, reporter, editor and literary man. ‘Tradition adds 
that he also was a painter. 

His Gospel was written between 63 and 66 A. D. 

Dr. A. B. Simpson in his “Christ in the Bible,’ com- 
menting on Colossians 4: 14, says, “Herein we find a man 
in professional life rising above and reaching beyond his 
professional duties, and accomplishing the noblest service 
for God and man. For Luke became the friend of Paul, 
_ the author of one of the most beautiful and valuable of the 
Gospels, and the chronicler of the history of the Early 
Church. So God loves to use men in unconventional ways. 
The need of the Church today is not a larger number of 
ordained clergymen, but a larger number of men and 
women in social, secular and professional life whose entire 
influence and talents are at the service of the Master; not 
a salaried and dependent priesthood who preach the Gospel 
because it is expected of them merely, but a great body 
of consecrated irregulars, Nehemiahs, Josephs, Esthers, 
Daniels, who use their earthly station in the providence of 
God as a standpoint from which to serve and witness for 
their heavenly Master, and bless their fellowmen.”’ 

Luke 1:1. “Forasmuch as many have taken in hand,” 
etc. Luke’s prologue is a study. Godet says, “Not only 
is it written in the most classical Greek, but it reminds us 
by its contents of the similar preambles of the most illus- 
trious Greek historians, especially those of Herodotus and 
Thucydides.” It betrays a delicate sentiment and a refined 
mind such as were characteristic of the Greek character. 
There is a modesty in Luke’s prologue which is admirable. 
Luke, though evidently possessing great ability, placed him- 
self among men of the second order. He excuses his bold- 





THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 15 


ness of undertaking such a work by the fact that many had 
undertaken what he was doing. Godet holds that only in 
the Acts and the Epistle to the Hebrews do we find a style 
like that of Luke’s gospel. ‘These things which are most 
surely believed among us.” Luke was certain of his matter. 
He wrote in no doubtful disputation, but rather things that 
were most surely believed or, as some translate it, “the 
things which were performed”; i. e., which Christ and His 
apostles had done. May we not today rejoice that the doc- 
trine which Christians hold is what thousands of the wisest 
and best of men have ventured their souls upon? 

2. “Eye witnesses and ministers of the word.” Luke had 
access to materials which he received from those who had 
seen for themselves. These not only witnessed but became 
servants of the Lord Jesus Christ and so ministered this 
Gospel to others. 

3. “It seemed good to me also.” Luke does not profess 
any more knowledge than his predecessors. He acknowl- 
edges that he belongs to the second generation and hence 
was dependent upon the narrative of the apostles. “Hay- 
ing had a perfect understanding of all things from the 
first—,” this scholarly man did not rest upon nor write 
mere tradition, but acquainted himself with the facts nec- 
essary to the writing of his Gospel. As Henry puts it, “He 
wrote his history as Moses wrote his,—of things reported 
by tradition and ratified by inspiration.” ‘Most excellent 
Theophilus.” Here is something unique. Luke dedicated 
his Gospel as one has indicated, not to a patron but to a 
pupil. He was not so eager to have reputation given to his 
work as that someone might be edified by it. There are 
those who prefer to believe that Theophilus, meaning as it 
does “lover of God,” refers to any Christian rather than 
to some particular individual. Origen supposed that 
Theophilus was a purely fictitious person, but the best 
scholarship will not allow this. There is some traditional 
information about this person found in the “Clementine 
Recognitions.” According to this Theophilus was at the 
head of all the men of power at Antioch, consecrated under 
the name of the Church. He was, therefore, some great 
lord residing in the capital of Syria. Acording to this 


16 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


_ theory Luke may have been a freed man of the house of 
Theophilus. Good authorities so believe, and that Luke 
was freed by Theophilus and practiced as a physician in 
Antioch, where he was converted about the time of the 
founding of the church in Antioch and so became 
acquainted with Paul and decided to accompany him on a 
mission. ‘This would account for his rejoining Paul at 
Troas before Paul went into Macedonia as Acts 16 records. 
The expression “Most excellent’ Paul used when he ad- 
dressed Festus, the governor (Acts 26:25). These two 
instances suggest to us that religion should not be divorced 
from civility and good manners, but rather should find us 
giving honor to whom honor is due. 

4. “Know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast . 
been instructed.’ Evidently Theophilus had been instructed 
prior to baptism, or subsequent thereto, and possibly by Luke 
himself. But since Luke recognized him as a man of qual- 
ity and perhaps noble birth, he took great pains to fortify 
Theophilus against temptation by writing to him in detail, 
just as ministers should provide their congregations with 
reasons for the hope that is in them. 


§ 3. pe ee Genealogies. Mat. 1:1-17; Luke 3: 23- 


As we examine the two genealogies it becomes evident 
that Matthew’s is that through Joseph while Luke’s is that 
through Mary, as we will show. Such passages as Psalm 
132: 11, Luke 1:32, and Romans 1:3 make it necessary 
that Mary be a descendant of David. The Jews would 
accept no Messiah who did not have a “right” to sit on 
David’s throne. 

Matthew Henry writing on Christ’s “pedigree,” says 
“Matthew designed to show that Christ was the son of 
Abraham, in whom all the families of the earth are blessed, 
and that he was heir to the throne of David; and there- 
fore he begins with Abraham and brings the genealogy 
down to Jacob who was the father of Joseph, and heir- 
male of the house of David; but Luke designing to show 
that Christ was the seed of the woman, that should break 
the serpent’s head, traces his pedigree upward as high as 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 17 


Adam, and begins it with Eli, or Heli, who was the father, 
not of Joseph, but of the Virgin Mary.” 

Henry further states ‘“Matthew draws the pedigree from 
Solomon, whose natural line, ending in Jechonias, the legal 
rite was transferred to Salathiel, who was of the house of 
Nathan, another son of David, which line Luke here pur- 
sues and so leaves out all the kings of Judah... . The 
evangelists copied the genealogies out of the heralds’ books; 
and in them they found the pedigree of Jacob, the father 
of Joseph, to be as it is set down in Matthew; and the 
pedigree of Heli, the father of Mary, to be as it is set down 
here in Luke.” 

Jerome Travis by means of his copyrighted “Harmony 
of Matthew and Luke’s Genealogies” (which is shown in 
excellent diagram form) makes clear that Bathsheba bore 
to King David both Solomon and Nathan, 1 Chron. 3:5), 
and that through Solomon Matthew traces Joseph’s descent, 
while through Nathan Luke traces the line of descent to 
Mary. Says Travis, “Heli was the father of Mary and 
father-in-law of Joseph. Joseph was Heli’s son-in-law and 
by the usage of that age would be called his son as in Luke 
3:23.” Early Christian writers agreed that Mary was the 
daughter of Heli and this the Talmud, the Jewish book of 
law and tradition, confirmed. 


“The difference in the number of the generations given 
in the two Gospels is explained by the fact that with the 
Jews it was customary to name only the most important 
or noted persons in a family line. . . . Luke, writing for 
the Greeks, gives a more complete genealogy.” —Travis. 


§ 4, Birth of John the Baptist Promised. Luke 1: 5-25. 


The student, hungry for the historical setting of “the 
days of Herod, king of Judea,” would do well to ponder 
the well written pages of “Manual of Bible History” by 
Professor Blaikie (T. Nelson & Sons) who gives a vivid 
picture of the period in Judea. 

He portrays the aged priest Zacharias, traveling slowly 
along the road from Hebron to Jerusalem, noting with 
mournful feeling the palace of Herod on Mount Zion where 

2 


18 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


King David had dwelt, sighing heavily as he makes obei- 
sance to the cruel Idumean, the stern, shrewd Roman gov- 
ernor who occupies the place once graced by the gentle, 
pious, fatherly David or Josiah. So many changes have 
been made in Jerusalem, works of Herod, which have pro- 
faned the Holy City. Has he not even built, near the base 
of Mount Zion, the circus or hippodrome, for horse and 
chariot racing? And the presence of two stupendous build- 
ings, the theater and the amphitheater, indicate the intro- 
duction of gladiatorial fights and other savage sports. 

All about Jerusalem is foreign. ‘The language is dif- 
ferent. One hears no longer Hebrew, but a mixture of 
Syriac and Chaldee from the Hebrews; most speak Greek; 
military men speak the language of Rome. The Jewish 
religion consists of formality, legality and traditionalism. 
The old spirit is no more. Surely the glory of the Lord 
hath departed. 

But for Zacharias the day dawns. As he offers incense 
to God Gabriel, who had appeared to Daniel five hundred 
years before, comes to him and promises him a son. As 
a token of the reality of this promise Zacharias is struck 
dumb until John is born. 


I. Brrto Foretroip (8-22) 


8. “While he executed the priest’s office.” The priest 
daily offered sacrifice and attended to the ceremonies of the 
temple. “In the order of his course.” ‘There were twenty- 
four courses of priests and his was the eighth. 

9, “His lot was to burn incense.” Each priest in each 
course was determined by lot; some were to kill the sac- 
rifice, others to sprinkle the blood and yet others to burn 
the incense, etc. Abbott tells us that the lot was cast each 
week when the members of the course met in a room in the 
temple for that purpose. The golden altar of incense stood 
within the temple proper by the veil which separated it 
from the Holy of Holies. The Cambridge Bible tells us 
that there are said to have been twenty thousand priests in 
the days of Christ, and so it could never fall to the same 
priest to twice offer incense. If Zacharias had not had 
the vision extraordinary, this would yet have been the most 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 19 


memorable day in his life. The incense composed of fra- 
grant spices (Ex. 20: 34-38) symbolized prayer. 

10. “Multitude . . . were praying without.” The people 
stood in the temple courts silent in worship. When the 
incense of the morning and night burned, the worshippers 
with their faces toward the holy spot where the symbol of 
their devotions arose in fragrant clouds, prayed. They 
hoped that even as the incense ascended to the nostrils of 
Jehovah so their prayers might ascend to Him and that the 
latter would be just as acceptable as the former was odorous. 
“Time.of incense,’ 9 a. m. or 3 p. m. 

11. “There appeared ... an angel.” ‘This appearance 
is the first note in that overture of angels which introduced 
Christ to the world.”—Abbott. This was the first message 
of God given to man recorded in the Bible for four hun- 
dred years; that is, since the days of Malachi. 

13. “Fear fell upon him.” We can imagine this fear 
was a holy awe. When the human heart is face to face 
with an unknown power, there is always alarm or awe. 

13. “Thy prayer is heard.” Zacharias had prayed that 
he might have a son and that the kingdom of God might 
come. The child that was about to be promised to him 
was the realization of the answer to prayer to both. “Call 
his name John.” ‘The grace of Jehovah.” ‘The gracious 
gift of Jehovah.” The very name that the child was to 
receive was indicative of the message that the Lord was to 
proclaim through John. 

14. “Joy and gladness.” Gladness may be thought of as 
the expression of an inward experience, joy. ‘Many shall 
rejoice at his birth.” Not only the parents, but all who 
would receive the benefit of his message and ministry. 

15. “Shall be great in the sight of the Lord.” Godet 
says that this greatness was that which results from per- 
sonal holiness and the moral authority accompanying it. 
It was spiritual greatness; not simply outward pompous- 
ness. ‘And shall neither drink wine nor strong drink.” 
He was to be a Nazarite (Num. 6: 1-5), that he might be 
an example of holiness, consecration and self-control to 
the world. The Nazarites evidently raised the standard of 
self-control. “Filled with the Holy Ghost.” No one can 


b) 


20 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


do the work of the Lord acceptably unless he is baptized 
and filled with the Holy Spirit. Through the Holy Spirit 
alone can come the needed light, power, wisdom and 
strength of character necessary for the work of the Lord. 

16. “Many ... shall turn to the Lord.” When John 
came upon the scene, he found many of the Israelites living 
lives of sin and rebellion against the Lord God. He 
preached repentance and righteousness and called men back 
to the God of Israel. 

17. “He shall go-before him.’ Evidently the prophecy 
here is relative to the coming of Christ. John was destined 
to precede the Messiah that he might be a forerunner to 
Him. “The spirit and power of Elias.” The Jews 
gathered from Malachi that Elijah would visibly return to 
earth to announce the coming of the Messiah. Jesus ex- 
plained the meaning of Malachi and showed that John 
came as did the prophet Elijah, as a great righteous and 
moral reformer and a strong one in rebuking sin. “Turn 
the hearts of the fathers to the children.” Abbott suggests 
that this is to be taken figuratively and means that the 
hearts of the fathers, that is, the Israelites, were turned to 
the Gentiles, the children. This verse is suggestive of the 
importance of the work among the children. One has said 
that the devil is always suggesting that the minister should 
give his strength to old folks and let the children be cared 
for by somebody else. 

18. “I am an old man and my wife well stricken in 
years.” Just as Abraham and Sarah doubted the Lord when 
it had been announced to them that Isaac was to be born, 
so Zacharias doubted the possibility of a child being born 
when they were so well advanced in years. Zacharias, like 
most people, was slow to believe that the Lord is the God 
of the miraculous. 

19, “I am Gabriel.” Gabriel means the hero of God. 
“Sent .. . to show thee these glad tidings.” Gabriel was 
officially sent by the Lord and hence the message was not 
of his own making, but was given to him. What a great 
honor and joy to be a messenger of the Lord Jehovah! 

‘20. “Dumb . . . because thou believest not my words.” 
This was an actual case of inability to speak without doubt 





THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 21 


because of doubt. How many people today are silent so 
far as speaking for the Lord is concerned simply because 
they are not inclined to accept the message of the Lord. 
22. “They perceived that he had seen a vision.” The 
fact that he could not speak was proof to them that some- 
thing extraordinary had happened in the temple. This un- 
usual condition was necessary to persuade Zacharias and 
those about him that the Lord was surely working. The 
attention of people is always arrested by the miraculous. 


II. Conception (24, 25) 


24. “After those days... Elisabeth conceived.” In 
spite of her advanced years and the unbelief that had filled 
the mind of Zacharias, yet the Lord was working out His 
sure purpose. 

25. “The Lord ... take away my reproach.” It was a 
reproach among the Jews for a woman to go childless. It 
was also considered a great honor and evidence of great 
blessing for a child to be born. 


§5. The Annunciation to Mary. Luke 1: 26-38. 


1. THE VircIN WuHo BECAME MOTHER OF 
THE LORD 


a. Her name was Mary, meaning exalted, and highly 
favored she was above all other daughters of Israel. 

b. Daughter of a royal family, descended from David, 
she was known to be of the house of David. ‘The care of 
the Jews had preserved their genealogies, for Messiah was 
to be born and this expectation made it worth while to 
keep the record. 

c. She was a wirgin, espoused to one of the royal line, 
yet of low estate. “Christ’s mother was a virgin,” says 
Henry, “because He was to be born not by ordinary gener- 
ation but miraculously . . . he must partake of the nature 
of man yet not of the corruption of that nature.” Yet 
His mother was espoused so as not to cast a reflection on 
the holy ordinance of marriage. 

d. She was from Nazareth, a city of Galilee, in a far 
off corner of the country. Since it was near Gentile ter- 


22 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


ritory it was called Galilee of the Gentiles. Dr. Lightfoot 
notes that Jonah was of Galilee and Elijah and Elisha 
conversant there—all prophets. It is characteristic of Luke’s 
Gospel that a record should be given of Jesus coming from 
a region of the Gentiles since he was “Son of man.” 


2. THE ANGELIC ADDRESS 
“Hail, thou—etc.,” v. 28 


a. Appreciation of herself,—dignity. Mary’s concep- 
tion out of wedlock threw her open to the suspicion of her 
community. Only the recollection of the angelic greeting 
could bolster up her spirits and keep her fit for her solemn 
duties and extraordinary privilege. 

b. Expectation of great news. 


(a) Mary was magnified and dignified. “Thou art 
highly favored.” Even above Eve was she honored. 
The Latin has it gratia plena,—tfull of grace. 

(b) She had God with her (v. 28). A conscious- 
ness of being on God’s side makes for stability and 
courage. 

cf. Judges 6:12. Gideon’s modesty required such 
a visitation as would assure him of God’s presence 
that he might cut down his army from 32,000 to 300 
and then encounter 135,000. 

cf. Isa. 7:14. This Scripture given to (cf. § 6) 
Joseph was likely by him whispered to Mary, and 
they together rested on it as we today sing and recite 
“John, three, sixteen.” 

(c) She had God’s peculiar blessing. cf. v. 48 and 
Judges 5:24. We note in Mary a yieldedness to 
God’s will. She said, ‘‘Behold the handmaid of the 
Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.” 


In his “Studies in Church History,” Dr. Pardington 
notes, “With reference to the Virgin Mary perhaps Protes- 
tants have gone to the other extreme of neglecting her 
claims to just veneration. It is well to remember that she 
is pronounced ‘blessed among women’; while of herself 
she declared, ‘from henceforth all generations shall call me 
blessed.’ ” 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 125 
Protestants have gone to “the other extreme,’ referred 
to above because Romanists have not only worshipped but 
interceded Mary. Rev. H. G. Crisman, a Christian and 
Missionary Alliance missionary in Ecuador, related that a 
work of art in that country represented the pit filled with 
suffering souls; on either side of this place of torments 
was a ladder leading out. At the head of one ladder stood 
Mary eagerly reaching down to assist the wretched ones to 
freedom; while at the head of the other ladder was Jesus 
repelling the weak, exhausted efforts of the luckless victims. 
Such a warped unscriptural conception appeals to the ig- 
norant Roman Catholic and prejudices him against our 
Saviour and in favor of Mary. 

But as to Mary’s place among women let Rev. Edward 
J. Russell speak, “To what woman do you and I today look 
as the noblest of her kind? ‘To what woman do we look 
with supreme gratitude and reverence? Is it to Deborah, 
the Hebrew heroine, who led the forces of Israel to vic- 
tory when men skulked in their tents? Is it Joan of Arc, 
the stainless maid of France, or to Queen Elizabeth, a mas- 
terful monarch: to ‘George Eliot,’ peer of any man that 
has written an English novel? Is it to Julia Ward Howe, 
who has given us the finest battle-song ever written, or 
Frances Willard, whose fire-filled personality has done 
more than any man has ever done to undermine the power 
of the liquor traffic? For my part I look to one closer than 
any of these. But who is the most famous of all women 
today? What woman has appeared most largely in art? 
What woman, rightly or wrongly, has been the greatest 
influence in religion? There can be no doubt that it is she 
who in the spirit of prophecy exclaimed, ‘All generations 
shall call me blessed.’ ”’ 


§6. Annunciation to Joseph. Mat. 1: 18-25. 


Matthew Henry says, “The mystery of Christ’s incarna- 
tion is to be adored, not pried into.” The development 
of any foetus is a wonder (Eccles. 11:5), much more that 
of our Saviour in the virgin’s womb. It has been sug- 
gested that possibly when David wrote Psalm 139; 13-16 
he was speaking of Christ’s incarnation. 


24 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


This section records the marriage of the Virgin Mary to 
Joseph. It is noteworthy that Christ was conceived of a 
betrothed virgin in order that by this marriage might be 
truly reckoned as honorable. Evidently also this arrange- 
ment was a protection to Mary. As one has said, it was 
better that Jesus be known as “son of a carpenter” rather 
than as “son of a harlot.” Joseph was a great assistance 
to Mary in many practical ways. 

It appears that Joseph became aware of the state of 
pregnancy after Mary returned from her three months visit 
with Elisabeth (Luke 1:56). When Joseph discovered it 
others did also and we can easily imagine the suspicion in 
respect to Mary. Her dignified position exposed her to 
accusations of crime. 

Verse ninteen expresses Joseph’s conclusion after a time 
of perplexity. Henry conjectures that he struggled be- 
tween the rage of jealousy and affection. His decision to 
put her away privily indicates his clemency. cf. Deut. 22: 
23, 24 and Gen. 38:24. Had he exposed her it might 
easily have been justified as a “public example” case. Yet 
such “rigor of the law is sometimes the height of injus- 
tice.” He exercised the principle expressed by Peter, “Love 
covers a multitude of sins.” 

While Joseph was nonplused there came to him a dream 
(vs. 20, 21). In it he was reminded of his relationship to 
David that he might remember that he was of the royal 
line and hence could be more easily persuaded because of 
Messianic hope. His fears are silenced. Being suspicious 
of the conduct of his espoused he naturally would fear the 
opprobium connected with her name. 

So Joseph learned that Mary had conceived by the Holy 
Ghost according to Heb. 10:5, Gal. 4:4, and 1 Cor. 15: 
47. Being born of the “seed of woman” (Gen. 3:15) He 
escaped the “corruption and pollution” of man. His name 
Jesus indicates His work as Saviour. Jesus is the same as 
Joshua of the Old Testament. There are two Joshuas; 
one was /srael’s Captain, who led across the Jordan and 
on into Canaan; the other was Israel’s Priest (Zech. 6: 
11, 12). So Jesus was the Captain of our salvation and 
the High Priest of our profession. 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 25 


This conception was in keeping with the prophecy of 
Isaiah 7.14. © 

This was part of that “mystery of godliness” of which 
Paul wrote (1 Tim. 3:16). ‘In the volume of the book” 
it had been written of Christ and He responded, ‘Lo, I 
come to do thy will, O God” (Heb. 10:7). Of this last 
passage Graham Scroggie affirms that it is “The greatest 
utterance of the Bible.”’ So what was made clear to Joseph 
by the dream should have been believed by all who knew 
Isaiah’s prophecy; viz., that “fa virgin should be with 
child.” - And a spotless virgin Mary was (Luke 1:34) 
suited to give birth to Immanuel, the Mediator between 
God and man. He through this marvelous incarnation be- 
came the Daysman. He could “lay hand on both’ God 
and man. 

As verse 24 indicates, evidently Joseph speedily and cheer- 
ily married Mary. Then he lived with her that exemplary 
life (verse 25) so that when they went to enroll (Luke 2: 
5) it is said that she was his “‘betrothed.’”’ Some have in- 
ferred from this that they were not yet married, but Eder- 
sheim explains this apparent contradiction of Mat. 1:24 
and Luke 2:5 by noting that legally she was his “wife” 
yet actually she was as a “betrothed.” Jerome argued for 
the perpetual virginity of Mary, but Mat. 1: 25—“till she 
had brought forth a son’’—clearly is against any such as- 
cetic notion. Whitby cites Ex. 21:10 as a statement of 
what might be expected in this as in all marriages. Of 
course those who hold to the “perpetual virginity” theory 
believe that Joseph had been married once before. 


§7. Mary’s Visit to Elisabeth. Luke 1: 39-56. 


Mary, being younger and in a better physical condition 
for travel than Elisabeth, covered the scores of miles to 
be with her cousin. Henry is of the opinion that she 
sought “Leisure and help for devotion in the priest’s 
family” at Hebron (Josh. 21:10, 11). 

Dr. Lightfoot conjectures that Christ was there to be 
conceived. Shiloh of Judah should be conceived in a city 
of Judah. There came the promise to Isaac; there was 
circumcision instituted; there Abraham owned his first land 


26 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


and David wore his first crown. Here lay Abraham and 
Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah and, antiquity 
holds, Adam and Eve. Henry supports the notion that 
Christ was conceived in Hebron by reference to Luke 1: 
45, uttered by Elisabeth after Mary’s arrival. 


The confirmation as well as the congeniality of Elisabeth 
doubtless went far to make Mary responsive to the divine 
plan. 


Upon entering the house Mary saluted Elisabeth (v. 40) 
first doubtless because Zacharias was in retirement owing 
to being deaf and dumb. Then occurred that remarkable 
experience related in verse 41 when the babe Jeaped in her 
womb. ‘The Jews had a tradition that the unborn babes 
said “Amen” to praise God at the Red Sea. Elisabeth 
realized that the babe had leaped “for joy” and surely rec- 
ognized this as supernatural. Some have connected this 
with John 3:29. Then Elisabeth was “filled with the Holy 
Ghost” (cf. Luke 1:15) and congratulated Mary (verse 
42). 

We note here that Elisabeth manifested no jealousy; she 
did not “nurse a grudge.”’ Though she was of the Priest’s 
family yet she rejoiced that Mary had the supreme honor 
of being the mother of our Lord rather than herself, and, 
in fact, she recognized the condescension of Mary in com- 
ing to her (verse 43). Thus she manifested the same spirit 
as was shown by her son, John the Baptist, when Jesus came 
to him to be baptized (cf. Mat. 3:14). So in Elisabeth 
Mary found only helpfulness. She strengthened Mary’s 
faith by her own experience (v. 45). 

Then Mary broke forth in song in spite of fatigue. Her 
Magnificat reminds us of Hannah’s song of praise (1 Sam. 
2:1—). She reverently magnified the Lord (v. 46) and 
complacently rejoiced in Him (v. 47). 

She recognized the condescension of the Lord in select- 
ing her even as He had visited Leah (Gen. 29:31) and 
Hannah (1 Sam. 1:19) of old. She, like Gideon (Judg. 
6:15), took the low place and the Lord raised her up. He 
does exalt whom men despise if it is His purpose. Mary 
wonders at the Lord’s doing (v. 49) and appreciates His 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 27 


_ mercy (v. 50). He “evens things up” as is expressed poet- 
ically in verses 51-55. 


§8. Birth of John the Baptist. Luke 1: 57-80. 


The fact that Elisabeth was to be blessed with this child 
was an occasion of great rejoicing among her neighbors 
and kindred (v. 58). 


The old Jewish custom was carried out with great sig- 
nificance (y. 59). It is interesting to see how those that 
were used to pave the way for ushering in the dispensation 
of grace were true to the religion of their fathers. God 
does most for those who have been faithful in using what 
they have. ‘They called him Zacharias after the name of 
his father.” At the ceremony of the circumcision, the child 
was named and it was entirely fitting that he should be 
named after his father. 


But “His mother answered...Notso; but John.’ Doubt- 
less Zacharias had conferred with her by writing what had 
been revealed to him in the vision and she, gathering from 
his mute condition and the fact that a miracle was being 
performed in the bearing of the child, believed that the 
name designated by Zacharias was the name ordered of 
God. 


Then “They made signs to his father.” Evidently 
Zacharias was deaf as well as dumb, else he could have 
heard what they said. 


“He wrote... his name is John.” Zacharias had learned 
his lesson and was willing to conform to the wish of the 
Lord. Thus Zacharias testified that the grace of God was 
about to be manifest to Israel through the coming to the 
world of this new babe. 


So “His mouth was opened . . . his tongue loosed and 
he spoke and praised God.” He had seen the subject of 
his vision and the object of his prayer consummated. We 
can imagine that it was beyond his faith and yet it was the 
fulfillment of his hope and the satisfaction of a longing of 
his heart. 


28 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§9. Birth of Jesus the Christ. Luke 2: 1-7. 


The decree of Cesar Augustus, the Roman Emperor, re- 
quiring a general taxation, each in his own city, made it 
necessary for Joseph and Mary to go to Bethlehem, the 
city of their family. There was great opposition to this 
“census” or “enrolling” or “taxation.” One Judas of Gal- 
ilee raised an army to resist it (cf. Acts 5:37). 


Mary and her husband went southward. When they ar- 
rived in Bethlehem they took up their abode in what had 
been used as a stable. Says Edersheim, “If we think of 
Jesus as the Messiah from heaven, the surroundings of out- 
ward poverty, so far from detracting seem most congruous 
to His Divine character. Earthly splendor would seem here 
like tawdry tinsel, and the utmost simplicity like that cloth- 
ing of the lilies, which far surpassed all the glory of 
Solomon’s court.” But humble abode argued no social in- 
feriority. 

Bethlehem was filled with sacred memories. There Jacob 
mourned his beloved Rachel; there Ruth’s gleaning was 
the heart of Boaz; there David tended his father’s sheep 
and sang songs which supply worship even today. On 
these plains “shepherds kept their flocks by night” when 
there came that angelic song announcing our Redeemer’s 
birth. Here first fell upon listening ears that anthem of 
“divine beauty and thrilling force’—‘‘Glory to God in the 
highest,” etc. 

Monkish tradition points to a cave at the extremity of 
the town as the scene of the nativity. A church and con- 
vent, “The Church and Convent of the Nativity,’ have 
been erected over this cave. A silver star in the floor of 
a subterranean chamber is said by legend to mark the pre- 
cise place of Christ’s birth. But not until three centuries 
after Christ were “sacred places” sought, hence there was 
the indefiniteness of locations, and doubtless providentially 
so, lest the sureness of place would supplant the sincerity 
of the spirit, as is the case with some even now. 

While Joseph and Mary, “wife” of Joseph though stand- 
ing to him only in the actual relationship of “betrothed,” 
were in Bethlehem Christ was born. Luke 2: 7 tersely tells 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 29 


the naked fact of Him who was “Prince of Peace,” destined 
-to be “King of kings,” the God-man. Says Edersheim, 
“Beyond this announcement of bare fact, Holy Scripture, 
with indescribable appropriateness and delicacy, draws a 
veil over that most sacred memory.” 


$10. The Angels and the Shepherds. Luke 2. 8-20. 


Jewish tradition is helpful here. There was a settled 

conviction that Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. It 
was also believed that He would be revealed from Migdal 
Elder, “the tower of the flock,’ whence the flocks destined 
for Temple sacrifices were watched. Edersheim tells us 
that the keeping of flocks in those days was forbidden ex- 
cept they were kept for use in the temple services. These 
shepherds doubtless had come in contact with the revelation 
given in the Old Testament Scriptures, and were students 
of the stars and so looking forward to the coming of that 
star which was to guide the wise men to the stable at Beth- 
lehem. 

We take it for granted that these shepherds were watch- 
ing for some sign of Jesus’ coming and to them was given 
a sign. Moreover the Lord took pains to send an Angel 
to them. The watchful will be rewarded. The: Angel of 
the Lord appeared to these shepherds while they were on 
‘duty caring for their precious flocks under the stars. These 
shepherds were unaccustomed to angelic visions and hence 
they feared, but the friendly messenger was quick to bid 
them “fear not,’”’ and to tell them that hé was the bringer 
of “tidings of great joy,” not only for them but for “all 
the people.” All who have heard of the angelic message 
and have received it as did the simple-hearted shepherds, 
have been filled with the joy of the Lord. The world has 
needed and does need the Saviour who is the only satisfac- 
tion of the human heart. It is the joy of the Lord that is 
the strength of His people. Joy comes when the satisfying 
portion is received. 

The messenger told of the Saviour coming to the City 
of David. He who was to occupy the throne of the great 
King David, was being born in a lowly state. He was to 
be the Saviour to save His people from their sins. He was 


30 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Christ, the Anointed of God, and He was Lord, the rightful 
Ruler of the world, and yet He was as a babe wrapped in 
swaddling clothes lying in a manger. Certainly He might 
have come into the world as a spectacular personage, but 
the purposes of redemption would not have been realized 
had He not voluntarily emptied Himself and come in this 
lowly way. 

The heavenly host which praised the Lord in the pres- 
ence of the shepherds, said “Glory to God in the highest, 
and on earth, peace, good will toward men.” ‘The sig- 
nificance of this is most interesting indeed. Jesus came 
into the world to glorify the Father. He clearly affirmed 
that He was not seeking His own glory, but that of the 
Father. His coming into the world to be the Saviour 
would cause men to know God and glorify Him as the Lord 
of their lives. His coming also meant peace on earth. Sin 
has brought strife into the world. Satan’s dominion means 
conflict, slaughter and unrest, but perfect and everlasting 
peace will be realized when Jesus has perfect control over 
the world. Those who enthorne Him now realize the peace 
of God. The grand consummation will see good will exist- 
ing among men. Selfishness will disappear and altruism 
will prevail. 

Edersheim accepts the tertus receptus on Luke 2: 14, 

“Glory to God in the highest— 

And on earth peace— 

Among men good pleasure 
and comments as follows, “Heaven took up the strain of 
‘glory’; earth echoed it as ‘peace’; it fell on the ears and 
hearts of men as ‘good pleasure.’”’ They sang prophet- 
ically. Having received the angelic message and listened 
to the “In excelsis Gloria” of “a multitude of the heavenly 
host” the shepherds entered Bethlehem and found the 
“stable’’ where the “holy group” was housed. Evidently 
Mary had received no ministration of loving hands for had 
she not herself wrapped the babe in swaddling clothes? 
(Luke 2:7, 12.) 

Having seen the unusual family of three the shepherds 
went forth to “spread the rumor,” as Scheusner translates 
‘made known.” Soon Simeon, Anna and others were eager 


? 
! 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 31 


to see Him, “the Babe of Bethlehem.” ‘And yet it seemed 
_ all so sudden, so strange, that on such a slender thread as 
the feeble throb of an infant life the salvation of the world 
should hang and no special care watch over its safety, no 
better shelter be provided it than a ‘stable,’ no other cradle 
than a manger.”—Edersheim. 


The heavenly message borne to the humble parents by 
the shepherds reminds the author of a remarkably put para- 
graph in Edersheim’s “Life and Times of the Messiah’: 
“It has been observed, that by the side of every humiliation 
connected with the Humanity of the Messiah, the glory of 
His Divinity was made to shine forth. .. . Thus, if He 
were born of the humble maiden of Nazareth, an angel an- 
nounced His birth; if the Infant-Saviour was cradled in 
a manger, the shining host of heaven hymned His advent. 
And so afterwards if He hungered and was tempted in the 
wilderness, angels ministered to Him, even as an angel 
strengthened Him in the agony of the garden. If He sub- 
mitted to baptism, the Voice and vision from heaven at- 
tested His Sonship; if enemies threatened, He could mi- 
raculously pass through them; if the Jews assailed, there 
was the voice of God to glorify Him; if He was nailed to 
the cross, the sun craped his brightness and the earth 
quaked; if He was laid in a tomb, angels kept its watches, 
and heralded His rising.’ 


§11. The Circumcision. Luke 2: 21. 


The virgin mother of our Lord is a most interesting 
study. She knew that Christ had been conceived by the 
Holy Spirit and was destined to be great (Luke 1: 26-38; 
1:43, et al.) yet “she kept all these sayings and pondered 
them in her heart” (Greek here is “sacredly guarded . . . 
and put them together in thought”), even the angelic reve- 
lation to the shepherds. She treasured anything she heard 
about Jesus. She wondered about it, turning it over in her 
mind. She was vitally interested in each step in His life. 
She manifested an unusual interest in His lingering at the 
temple to discuss with the doctors. He was an enigma to 
her. She was proud of Him; she loved Him as a mother 


32 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


and evidently she treated Him as a human son. Had not 
this been so He would not have lived the life of a man as 
He did. Had His God-sidé been emphasized constantly 
men would not have been natural or normal in His presence. 


So Mary as a good Jewish woman fulfilled the require- 
ments of the law by having her son circumcised. Then He 
received “the Angel-given name” Joshua (Jesus). It was 
right that Christ be circumcised for He was “made under 
the law” (Gal. 4:4). He submitted to it for our sakes. 
His obedience was perfect. He, by this rite, was supposed 
to be admitted from being a stranger to the covenant of 
God, yet He wasa Son. Henry suggests “it supposed Him 
a sinner that needed His filthiness taken away.” So He 
was made “in the likeness of sinful flesh’ (Romans 8:3). 
In His dedication at eight days we see a ground for the 
dedicating of infants early even though later they be bap- 
tized as He was. 


§12. The Presentation in the Temple. Luke 2: 22-39. 


Mary, conforming to the law, gave due attention to the 
requirements of her own purification and to the presenta- 
tion of her son to God. When practicable, the redemption 
of the first-born and the purification of his mother were 
combined. ‘I'he redemption consisted of the formal pres- 
entation of the child to the priest, accompanied by two 
short ‘benedictions’-—the one for the law of redemption, 
the other for the gift of a first-born son, after which the 
redemption money was paid.” ‘This was in keeping with 
Num. 18:15, 16, Lev. 27:6. 

The expression, ‘““When the days of their purification ac- 
cording to the law of Moses were fulfilled” refers to the 
forty days which, according to the law, must elapse between 
the birth of the child and the ceremonial purification of 
the mother and child (Lev. 12). The Rabbinic law fixed 
the time at 41 days for a son and 81 days for a daughter. 

Mary brought a pair of turtle doves or two young pigeons 
(v. 24); one instead of a lamb for a burnt offering (be- 
cause she was poor) and the other for a sin offering. So 





THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 33 


she offered not only her son (though He were not only 
God’s but God, yet as our Mediator He was offered for our 
sakes) but a burnt offering also, and in the sin offering 
she came confessing her sin. Thus all righteousness was 
fulfilled. The law was not violated either for Christ or 
by Christ but fulfilled in detail, not in empty show but 
with a satisfying reality. 

Joseph and Mary in the temple met Simeon, who evi- 
dently was a most remarkable character. Some have be- 
lieved that he was the son of the great Hillel, president of 
the college and the Sanhedrin, and that he was the father 
of Gamaliel, at whose feet sat Saul of Tarsus. Jews claim 
that he was endued with a prophetical spirit. No mention 
is made of him in their Mishna, or book of traditions, 
“which,”’ says Henry, “Intimates that he was no patron of 
their fooleries.” 

“Simeon combined the three characteristics of Old Testa- 
ment piety: ‘justice,’ as regarded his relation and bearing 
to God and man; ‘fear of God,’ in opposition to the boast- 
ful self-righteousness of Pharisaism; and above all, long- 
ing expectancy of the near fulfillment of the great promises, 
and that in their spiritual import as the ‘Consolation of 
Israel.’ ”’—Edersheim. 

Simeon represented that expectancy for the appearing of 
the Son of David, the Messiah, that was present in Israel 
due to the element of prophetism. “The Pharisees hoped 
that God would some day establish His all-powerful king- 
dom among the Jews and that the whole world would be 
subject to Jerusalem, the capital of the anointed of God, the 
Messiah.”’—Burton and Matthews. Jewish prophets had 
declared that God would send One to deliver them from 
national distress provided they kept His commandments 
and were true to Him in other ways. Though unfaithful- 
ness hindered the fulfillment of the promise, yet the hope 
continued and grew deeper and deeper. It included the 
longing for and expectation of a specific person. Though 
a religious hope this hope was fostered by national misfor- 
tune. All classes agreed that Messiah would be David’s 
son and preached by Elijah (Mal. 4:5, Mark 9:11, 12). 

3 


34 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


A Messianic Psalm of the Pharisees is interesting at 
this point. I quote a little: 

“Behold, O Lord and raise unto them their King, 
the son of David, in the time, which thou, O God, 
knowest, that he may reign over Israel, thy servants, 
and gird him with strength, that he may break in 
pieces them that rule unjustly. 


‘And he shall possess the nations of the heathen to 
serve him beneath his yoke. 

“And he shall not faint all his days, because he 
leaned on God. 


“Blessed are they that shall be born in those days to 
behold the blessing of Israel” . . . etc. 


Simeon held this “hope” in a vital way. On him was 
the Holy Spirit not only to make holy but to enable him 
to prophesy. He had received a revelation that he would 
see the Lord’s Christ, the Anointed of God. His hopes 
were realized. He rejoiced as all Israel should have re- 
joiced. 

Then this holy saint prayed that he might “depart in 
peace” (v. 29). He had lived to see “the Lord’s Christ” 
and having seen Him he was ready to die. He could con- 
fidently commit all to God now that Messiah had come. 
For Messiah’s coming to the Jewish mind would solve all 
problems religious and political. He would be the “Serv- 
ant of the Lord’’—alike the crown, the completion and rep- 
resentative of Israel. Messiah, “the Servant of the Lord,” 
combined the threefold office of Prophet, Priest and King. 
So Messiah was expected to establish the Kingdom of God 
on earth. To the pious Jew “the whole past was symbolic 
and typical of the future— ... two sayings of the Talmud 
(were): ‘All the Prophets prophesied only of the days of 
the Messiah,’ and “Ihe world was created for the Mes- 
siah.’ ” 

So Simeon held in his own arms and saw with his own 
eyes the “salvation” (v. 30) of the Lord. Messiah meant 





THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 35 


deliverance, justice, and the realization of all high and holy 
ideals for Israel. And yet He would be “before the face 
of all peoples.” He was “a light to lighten the Gentiles” 
as well as “The glory of thy people Israel.” 

Verse 33 indicates that Simeon had a deeper insight into 
Christ’s future than did Joseph and Mary. His blessing 
them (v. 34) was priestly or patriarchal. (Some hold he 
was a priest.) He seems to see that while many would be 
lifted up by this Messiah yet many would go down before 
Fim as the words, “This child is set before the falling and 
rising up of many,” indicate. As Peter said, “Unto you 
therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which 
be disobedient . . . a stone of stumbling and a rock of 
offense.” 

Then Simeon prophesied of the pain and sorrow that 
Mary would undergo because of her intimate relationship 
to Him (v. 35). Imagine her anguish at the crucifixion. 
It must have been as if a sword was thrust through her 
heart. Yet the cross was necessary. It is the touchstone 
of the race. By the cross men are tested. Christ, antici- 
pating myriads coming to the foot of the cross for salva- 
tion, “endured the cross, despising the shame” CHepil2: 
2). Yet the preaching of “Christ crucified” was to the 
Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness. And 
so is it today. The Gospel is to some the “savour of life 
unto life” and to others “of death unto death.” 

Then there was Anna, the widowed prophetess, as Paul 
would say, “a widow indeed,” who spent her time in the 
temple where she worshipped “with fastings and supplica- 
tions.” At the hour of Christ’s presentation she came up 
to the temple (she did not actually live there) and recog- 
nized in Him the One who should bring the “redemption 
of Jerusalem.” Her longing was for redemption from the 
political tyranny of Judea under Rome, for the recovery 
of her exiled tribe, Asher; she wished for better social, 
moral and religious conditions. Her hopes were nourished 
in the temple, but not by the rabbis. She whispered her 
faith in the Babe of Bethlehem to like-minded spirits. 


36 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§13. The Wise Men From the East. Mat. 2: 1-12. 


Evidently these men came from Chaldea, Persia or some 
other Eastern country where the Jews had been during 
captivity. Their information doubtless had been received 
from Jewish prophecies. Balaam’s prophecy (Num. 24: 
17) clearly referred to a “Star.” Many astronomers with- 
out success have undertaken to show, the noted Kepler 
being one, that contemporaneous with Christ’s birth was 
a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn which produced “the 
star” visible to the Magi. 


“Wise Men,” Magi, was a term used of those who used 
magical arts as well as of “Eastern (specially Chaldee) 
priest-sages, whose researches, in great measure as yet mys- 
terious and unknown to us, seem to have embraced much 
deep knowledge, though not untinged with superstition.” 
To the latter class the Magi of Matthew must have be- 
longed. 


It was after the Babe of Bethlehem had been seen by the 
shepherds, had been presented at the temple where He was 
beheld by Simeon and Anna, that “His Star” was seen by 
these ““Wise Men,” representatives of the Gentile nations. 
It was fitting that He who was the desire of nations should 
receive this attention from these Gentiles since He was 
destined to be “King over all.” Though He had “emptied 
Himself” of those insignia to royalty which the world and 
the Jews especially naturally expected, yet it would have 
been pathetic indeed had no one seen in Him “the King of 
the Jews.” But in these Wise Men we find that wisdom 
that scented out Him who was not detected by “His own’’ 
who received Him not. That Israel was not ready to receive 
such a Messiah as was Jesus is evident, or else through 
the shepherds, Simeon and Anna the news would have soon 
been carried to the Jewish world. But they could not ac- 
cept a Messiah in swaddling clothes. So the enthusiasm 
of these witnesses was regarded as fanaticism. 

We do not wonder that to Jerusalem the Wise Men came 
to find “the King of the Jews.” Jerusalem should have 
known. 

But what a response greets the earnest seekers from the 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 37 


East. ‘Their question, “Where is he,” etc., is met with 
confusion. Jealous Herod knits his brow in perplexity. 
The Jews are vexed lest the cruel Idumzan shall put forth 
an edict of destruction. Temporal interests loom larger 
than even the Messiah. 

But the crafty king sets about to make sure of destroy- 
ing any possible rival to his throne. Assembling “the chief 
priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where 
the Christ should be born.” ‘Their findings were “In Beth- 
lehem of Judea,” as Micah had written. By this forced 
inquiry and admission God was accumulating evidence for 
the incarnation, but tragic enough is it that the Jews made 
no effort to accept Him, as a nation. Their traditions had 
blinded their eyes to truth. Their own Messianic concep- 
tions carried more weight than simple prophetic statements. 

Having learned from the “wise men” of the Gentiles of 
the presence of a “King of the Jews” and having learned 
from the wise men of the Jews where their longed for 
Messiah and King was to be born, Herod next inquires 
when the “star” appeared. Then this monster of iniquity 
intelligently and secretly laid his plans to destroy the “Seed 
of woman,” but high heaven knew and watched over the 
Infant. 

Herod’s pretence to seek information as to the exact 
whereabouts of the Child Jesus in order that he might wor- 
ship Him (v. 8) is but a commentary on his false char- 
acter. 

Now the sidereal guide again leads the Magi until it 
stands “over the place where the young child was.” The 
stationary star was an indication to them that their journey 
was ended. And with a “Eureka” of exultation they en- 
tered into the presence of Him who had been the Object 
of their quest. 

Their first act was to worship Him. Divinely led, they 
paid homage to Him who one day will receive not only 
the plaudits and praise but the worship of all mankind, 
when “‘to Him every knee shall bow and every tongue con- 
fess,’ when kings will cast their crowns at His feet and all 
will join in the “Hosanna, to the King.’”’ All this the wor- 
ship of the Gentiles from the East anticipated, but it was 


38 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“done in a corner.” Kings of earth and Emperor of Rome 
were unwilling to relinquish their power then, as the Jews 
were not ready to accept a Messiah from heaven. Man, 
created in God’s image, has at least a measure of freedom. 
He exercises that. But another unseen force controlled 
many on earth. “Kings of earth, dominated by the God 
of this age, set themselves . . . against our Lord and against 
His anointed.” Cherished systems are tenaciously held to 
and our Master must wait. His reception tarries. ‘He 
came into His own [things] and they that were His own 
received Him not.’ But what a reception accorded Him 
by these Magi! “Ancient tradition represents one of these 
as a prophet, and links him with the gift of myrrh, as the 
type of the sorrow and hunger of the hearts that were cry- 
ing out for God. The second is described as a priest, bring- 
ing his gift of frankincense, and representing the needs of 
man for a Saviour’s intercession and offering. The third 
is a king and brings his gifts of gold. The same tradition 
beautifully adds, that when the gold was poured at His 
feet, the little child looked in the face of the worshipper, 
but made no other sign. As the second presented his fra- 
grant incense, He gently smiled in the face of the sage. 
But as the third bowed with his sorrowful face and his gift 
of myrrh, the tradition declares that the Child stretched 
forth His little hand and tenderly touched the trembling 
man who was weeping at His cradle. Whether true or 
not, the suggestion, at least, is both true and beautiful. 
Our costliest offerings are acceptable to Christ; but more 
welcome is the sinner’s approach, bringing his guilt and 
need; and most welcome of all is the sorrowing and broken 
heart, which He stoops to raise and rest upon His own 
loving bosom.”—A. B. Simpson in “Christ in the Bible.” 

The ancient Church saw in the gold a symbol of Christ’s 
royalty; in the myrrh, a symbol of His humanity, “and 
that in the fullest evidence of it, in His burying”; in the 
incense, a symbol of His Divinity. 

Having done homage and presented gifts to the Infant 
Jesus the wise men, warned by God in a dream, returned 
to their own country by another way and so eluded Herod, 
who was eager to do away with the Son of God because 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 39 


he feared for his throne. ‘To what nefarious tricks men 
will stoop to guard some fancied power or government. 
One would almost think that there should be a special judg- 
ment of tyrants, yet He who judgeth righteously knows 
the weakness of men and surely realizes the abnormal strain 
upon a mere man with great authority. But only God's 
interposition kept the usurping Idumzan from murdering 
the God man, as an infant. Oh, the mercy of God! 


§14, The Flight Into Egypt and Return to Nazareth. 
Mat. 2: 13-23. 


“Warned by the Angel of the Lord in a dream, the Holy 
Family sought temporary shelter in Egypt.” And _ so 
Hosea’s prophecy, “Out of Egypt did I call my son” (Hos. 
11:1) was fulfilled. There were many Jews in Egypt at 
this time and probably suitable companionship was found. 
This sparing of “The Holy Child Jesus” in Egypt, when an 
irate king would have treated Him as were all babes under 
two years of Bethlehem, despatched, reminds us of the 
saving of the life of the babe Moses, when Pharaoh had 
decreed to destroy all the male children of the Israelites 
(Ex. 2:1—). Thus the remarkable Nile and its “gift,” 
Egypt, was a second time a haven for a deliverer of the 
people of God. . For Herod had been baffled by the Magi 
and so sought to rid himself of his imagined competitor by 
a ruthless slaughter of all of Bethlehem’s babes. We can 
see the necessity for a hurried flight into Egypt or else de- 
tection would have been certain in so small a town as Beth- 
lehem. Edersheim estimates that no more than twenty 
babes were under two years in that place. Herod’s act of 
cruelty in this case was in keeping with his character and 
conduct. He placed no premium on life. “He was merely 
the tool of Satan,’ and capable of unspeakable atrocities. 
These infants have been regarded as the “protomartyrs,” 
the first witnesses of Christ, “the blossom of martyrdom” 
(‘flores martyrum” as Prudentius calls them). And Herod 
who destroyed whole families when a suspicion that his 
crown was in danger entered his mind, was a suitable in- 
strument of evil to execute such a fiendish crime. 


40 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


On the quotation from Jeremiah 31:15, Edersheim says, 
“In the murder of ‘the Innocents’ the evangelist sees the ful- 
filment of Rachel’s lament (who died and was buried in 
Ramah) over her children, the men of Benjamin, when the 
exiles to Babylon met in Ramah, and there was bitter wail- 
ing at the prospect of parting for hopeless captivity, and 
yet bitterer lament, as they who might have encumbered 
the onward march were pitilessly slaughtered.” In Jew- 
ish thinking the unity of the Old Testament was regarded. 
All pointed to Messiah. “The words of Hosea were in the 
highest sense ‘fulfilled’ in the flight, and return of the Sav- 
iour from Egypt. To an inspired writer, nay, to a true 
Jewish reader of the Old Testament, the question in regard 
to any prophecy could not be: “What did the prophet?— 
but, What did the prophecy?—mean. cf. 1 Pet. 1:9-11. 
And this could only be unfolded in the course of Israel’s 
history. Similarly, those who ever saw in the past the 
prototype of the future, and recognized in events, not only 
the principle, but the very features of that which was to 
come, could not fail to perceive in the bitter wail of the 
mothers of Bethlehem over their slaughtered children, the 
full realization of the prophetic description of the scene 
enacted in Jeremiah’s day.” 

Probably the family of our Lord did not stay long in 
Egypt. Herod’s day of death came and thus the reason 
for Jesus being away from His native land was removed. 

Herod’s death was accompanied with much misery. for 
years he had had no rest owing to the danger of a rival to 
his throne haunting him. Though he had sacrificed thou- 
sands in his vain effort to drive from his mind the ghost 
of fear of rivals yet was he ill at ease. Then fears seized 
him. Remorse gnawed at his mind. He would, in his 
frenzy, call for his “passionately-loved” wife, Mariamme, 
and her sons, who had been among his murdered victims. 
In his madness he attempted suicide. A most loathsome 
disease took hold of him. Says Blaikie, “It consisted of a 
slow fever, with ulcerations that bred worms,—swollen 
feet, want of breath, and convulsion fits.” Needless to say 
his sufferings were agonizing. Upon the advice of phy- 
sicians he was carried to the baths of Callirhce (east of the 





THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 41 


Jordan). He exhausted remedies to no purpose. When 
he realized death was imminent he had himself carried to 
his palace under the palm trees of Jericho. His last act of 
heartless tyranny was his consigning to the flames “two of 
the most honored and loved Rabbis—Judas and Matthias,” 
and the deposition of the High Priest, because these had 
participated in an attempt to “sweep away all traces of 
Herod’s idolatrous rule’ before his death. 

When he realized the end was near and believed that 
news of his death would be met with rejoicing he sum- 
moned Israel’s noblest from all over Jericho and had them 
shut up in the Hippodrome. To his sister Salome and her 
husband he assigned the unpleasant duty of having these 
slain as soon as he should die so that mourning instead of 
rejoicing would spread over the land. | 

Five days before his death he was delighted to receive 
from Cesar Augustus the permission to have his son Anti- 
pater executed. He it was who falsely accused and really 
murdered his half brothers Alexander and Aristobulus. 
Herod had reigned 37 years and was 70 when he died. 

Herod was buried with empty pageantry and “barbaric” 
splendor in the Castle of Herodium, near Bethlehem. The 
Jewish nobles were released and a Feast Day was declared 
instead of a day of mourning as Herod had desired. 

Herod had changed his will three times. His final one 
gave Archelaus the coveted position as his successor. The 
army at once recognized him as king, but he wisely deferred 
to accept the crown until he had the approval of Augustus. 
There were no less than four distinct delegations to Rome, 
but Augustus finally made Archelaus Ethnarch. 

When Joseph on his way home with his family learned 
of Herod’s successor he decided to go to Nazareth that 
was to be under a tetrarch because he “‘feared to go thither, 
and being warned of God in a dream.” When we learn 
of the character of Archelaus we do not wonder at the fear 
of Joseph nor the divine interposition. Archelaus “began 
his rule by .. . the slaughter of his opponents. . .. He far 
surpassed his father in cruelty, oppression and luxury, the 
grossest egotism, and the lowest sensuality, and that, with- 
out possessing the talent or energy of Herod, His briet 


42 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


reign ceased in the year six of our era, when the Emperor 
banished him, on account of his crimes, to Gaul.” Such 
was the crowned monster whom the holy family avoided 
by going to Nazareth. 


But this was as the prophets had foretold (v. 23). 
§15. Childhood at Nazareth. Mat. 2:23; Luke 2: (39) 
40. 


Jesus being called a “Nazarene” is most significant when 
we know for what Nazareth of Galilee stood. That He 
“srew, and waxed strong, filled with wisdom: and the 
grace of God was upon him” in Nazareth argues well for 
the possibility of such a development as He reached in busy 
commercial, worldly surroundings. 


Someone has humorously said that “Abe” Lincoln and 
such prodigies, who started to school late or attended very 
little, if at all, and yet reached gigantic intellectual stature, 
did so because “‘they were spared a lot of poor teaching.” 
It is a matter of history that Socrates was great in spite 
of the sophists of his day. Now the fact that Jesus went 
with His parents past Judea into Galilee would, by all the 
“learned” of His day, be considered a clear indication that 
His chances to become great in scholastic studies were nil. 
Judea stood for intricate scholastic studies; Galilee for 
active pursuits. The common saying was: “If a person 
wishes to be rich, let him go north; if he wants to be wise, 
let him come south.” All who wished to “learn the law” 
went to Judea. Galilee did not lend itself to a “reflective 
life.” Great centers of commerce were close by; foreign- 
ers were everywhere present; ‘‘one of the world’s greatest 
highways passed through Galilee.” On the other hand 
Judea invited one to an “introspective” or a ‘‘retrospective” 
life. The visitor in Judea, if he avoided “the great towns 

. centers of heathenism,”’ would meet “those gaunt rep- 
resentatives of what was regarded as the superlative ex- 
cellency of his religion.”” These men were what the Jews 
revered in religion. They were ascetic and studious in the 
mysteries of the Jewish faith and guides to heavenly 
portals. They could “bind or loose,” “remit or retain sins” 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 43 


in that they could hold a man to or release him from expi- 
atory sacrifices. ‘‘No Hindoo fanatic would more humbly 
bend before Brahmin saints, nor devout Romanist more 
venerate the members of a holy fraternity, than the Jew his 
great Rabbis. An illustration of this in its extremity is a 
dictum supported by an alteration of Proverbs 8:36. It 
runs as follows, “He who blows his nose in the presence 
of his Rabbi is worthy of death.” 

Now for reasons of geography and history Galilee was 
so different from Judea. Barrenness, decaying cities, soli- 
tary plains, with distant glorious Jerusalem ever in the far 
background, gave way to a beautiful country, olive trees, 
vineyards and a teeming population. Judea invited “soli- 
tary thought and religious abstraction”; no one in Galilee 
“would be likely to indulge in a morbid fanaticism.” In 
Rabbinic circles all that was Galilean was held in contempt. 
People of Galilee were blamed for neglecting their own 
language and accused of “ridiculous mistakes.” ‘A woman 
cooked for her husband two lentils (tlphj) instead of two 
feet (of an animal-tlpj) as desired. On another occasion 
a woman mal-pronounced ‘“‘Come, I will give thee milk,” into 
“Companion, butter devour thee!” 

So accustomed were people to say “Galilean—Fool!” 
that a woman so addressed the great R. Jese, who used two 
needless words in asking her the road to Lydda. The 
Rabbi asked: “What road leads to Lydda?” ‘The woman 
pointed out that, since it was not lawful to multiply speech 
with a woman he should have asked: ‘‘Whither to Lydda,” 
thus using two words instead of four words. 

But in despised Galilee Jesus came to a full human de- 
velopment. ‘To us He seems to be more truly “man” 
(anthropos) for having mingled with men of affairs in 
Nazareth of Galilee. More understandable do certain pas- 
sages of Scripture become to us since we know of Galilee. 
He “was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without 
sin” (Heb. 4:15). He was verily in the world, not in a 
convent, or monastery. We appreciate why the Jews mar- 
veled saying, “How knoweth this man letters, having never 
learned?” (John 7:15), and why Nicodemus was rebuked 
by the Chief Priests and Pharisees when he fairly but 


44 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


feebly stood up for Jesus and the import of the question, 
“Art thou also of Galilee? Search and look: for out of 
Galilee ariseth no prophet” (John 7:52). 

For a somewhat detailed and highly suggestive study of 
the probable child-life of Jesus the student would do well 
to carefully read “The Life and Times of Jesus the Mes- 
senger,”’ Edersheim, Vol. I, pp. 226-234. Herein we learn 
how the average Jewish home offered religious advantages 
in striking contrast to those of Gentile homes. Education 
began in the home and example preceded precept. The re- 
lation of parent to child and vice-versa the “semi-divine 
relationship” is clearly set forth in the Fifth Command- 
ment. Observe the punishment for its breach (Deut. 21: 
18-21) and the description of the vengeance that overtakes 
such a sin (Prov. 30:17). The mother had charge of the 
first education. ‘The Talmud has a saying of one of the 
School of Rabbi Jannai that knowledge of the law may be 
looked for in those who have sucked it at their mother’s 
breast. As the boy clung to his mother’s skirts while she 
attended to her religious household duties wonderment 
would begin to fill his mind. Then imagine how a Jewish 
mother could hold her child entranced with stories of Abra- 
ham, Moses and the Red Sea, Joshua and Jordan’s opening, 
Daniel and the lions, etc. It was all the history of her own 
son’s tribe. He listened and learned. Then she taught the 
Scriptures, as the story of Timothy shows (2 Tim. 3:14, 
15). For Timothy had known the Scriptures from an 
infant. 

And the father also was ‘“‘bound to teach the son.” Every 
other engagement, even the necessary meal, gave way to 
the father teaching the son the Torah (Law). Any man 
who neglected the duty was of the “profane, vulgar (an 
Am ha-arets).”” The memory for Scripture was cultivated. 
Soon the child learned his birthday verse—some verse of 
Scripture beginning or ending with, or at least containing, 
the same letters as his Hebrew name. “This guardian 
promise the child would insert in his daily prayers.” So 
was the child taught at home. Then he went to school, 
where he studied the Bible up to ten years of age, from 
ten to fifteen the Mishna or traditional law and then theo- 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 45 


logical studies. Leviticus was first studied, as it contained 
instruction in the ordinances with which the Jews should 
have been familiar. We cannot but wonder how the boy 
Jesus drank in the deeper meanings of those sacrifices which 
were typical of Himself, or who taught Him or who was 
nearest Him as He sat and studied the sacred volume, but 
that He learned it we know from His familiarity with it. 


“And the child grew.’”’ Jesus was not simply the divine 
child but the completely human lad. He increased physi- 
cally as He did in knowledge and wisdom. Professor 
Kendrick says that He went through all the natural grada- 
tions of childship and youthful development. The thought 
of the complete humanity of Christ is a comfort to us when 
we remember that He passed through the experiences of 
childhood and was hence subjected to the subtle perplexities 
and temptations of early life. “Waxed strong in spirit.” 
We can imagine that besides being a real boy, full of life 
and ready for every deed that a good boy would do, He 
was also of the proper spirit. “Filled with wisdom.” Ret- 
erence is here made to His spiritual, mental, and religious 
development. The context indicates that Jesus availed 
Himself of every opportunity to increase His knowledge 
and use it aright. “The grace of God was upon him.” He 
enjoyed the favor of the Lord. God was satisfied with His 
conduct. He was spiritual as well as strong physically. 
Boys that are real Christians are better in body and mind 
for so being. Attention here might be called to the sur- 
rounding influence amid which Christ grew up. He lived 
in the village surrounded by natural scenery. He breathed 
pure air and learned to work as well as pray. Though He 
were a king in spirit, yet unlike Moses, He was patient 
under the galling yoke of Rome. Surely He was taught 
the prophets and knew the Jewish hope of a Redeemer. He 
visited historic places and delved into the romance of His 
own national history. His school training was not ne- 
glected, since in His day education had been made com- 
pulsory. His home training must have been religious and 
according to the custom in Jewish homes. He would be 
compelled to commit to memory Old Testament Scriptures. 


46 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


$16. Visit to Jerusalem When Twelve Years Old. 
Luke 2: 41-50. 


His ‘Parents went to Jerusalem.”’ According to the law 
of Moses adult males were compelled to go to Jerusalem 
to attend the three great feasts (Passover, Pentecost, and 
Tabernacles). Devout women sometimes accompanied 
their husbands. “Feast of the Passover.’’ Commemora- 
tive of the Israelites leaving Egypt when the death angel 
passed over the homes of the Israelites, the blood was 
sprinkled on the doorposts and lintels. These religious 
feasts were enthusiastic religious meetings which made for 
the unity of the people and contributed toward social 
progress. 

“Twelve years old” is the age of responsibility. The 
Jewish boy at that age became “a son of the law.” 

“The child Jesus.” The word used here for child in the 
original may be translated “boy.” Prof. Riddle calls at- 
tention to the fact.that prior to this the diminutive term 
was used. ‘‘Tarried behind.” He was doubtless much in- 
terested in the temple and the teaching of the rabbis, and 
hence neglected to observe the departure of His caravan. 
“Joseph and his mother knew not of it.” The close im- 
plication is that the parents had such confidence in their 
son that they had no concern for Him. What a fine 
example the boy Jesus is to other boys! 

“A day’s journey.” The first day’s journey was likely 
not more than eight or ten miles. ‘“‘Kinsfolk and acquaint- 
ance.” The parents probably supposed that He would be 
among the younger set of their intimate friends. 

“Turned back . . . seeking him.” The implication is 
that they sought Him all the way back supposing that He 
probably started out with the company and for some reason 
had been left along the wayside. 

“After three days they found him.” Doubtless dating 
from the time they left Jerusalem first. Hence they must 
have spent at least a day in quest of Him after they arrived 
in the city. “Sitting in the midst of the doctors.” The 
“doctors’”’ or teachers’ seat, “not Moses’ seat’; the older 
students on a low bench; the younger on the ground, liter- 
ally “at the feet of” their instructor—Ellicott. We can 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 47 


imagine the affectionate, reverential, and sympathetic re- 
lationship that grew up between teachers and_ scholars 
under these conditions. ‘Hearing and asking questions.” 
The fact that Jesus asked questions as well as heard what 
the doctors said simply indicates that He was quite mature 
in His mind for His age and that He was doing what any 
interested scholar should do; that is, He asked questions. 
All good teachers testify that they learn a good deal from 
the questions that their pupils ask them. There is no doubt 
that the rabbis learned from the boy Jesus. Boys today 
should sit at the feet of Jesus of the Bible and learn, not 
simply by being lectured to, but by the question and answer 
method. Every great teacher comes to the Word of God 
in the spirit of a child. 

“Astonished at his understanding.” The rabbis were 
doubtless amazed at His knowledge of the Scriptures and 
His understanding of the real meaning. He penetrated 
more deeply into them than even they themselves had been 
accustomed to do. 

“They were amazed.” Joseph and Mary never expected 
to find their Son the object of such honor. We can easily 
imagine that by this time He was regarded in His home 
as quite an unusual child, yet they probably did not look 
for Him to be lost in theological discussion with the rabbis. 
“Son... thy father and I.” Mary here addresses Jesus 
as though He were the son of Joseph. This form of speech 
was required by custom. “Sought thee sorrowing.” ‘This 
was the first sorrow He had caused her.’ —Riddle. 

“How is it that ye sought me?” ‘The question seems to 
indicate that Jesus expected that they would know that He 
would be in the temple. He Himself was so occupied with 
the holy and blessed place that He felt His parents should 
have known of His great interest in His Father’s house. 
“That I must be about my Father’s business.” ‘The word 
“business” in the original is omitted, hence the idea is He 
thought His parents should know that He had been in His 
Father’s house or engaged in His Father’s affairs. When 
He was in Nazareth, His proper home, says Peloubet, was 
with Joseph and Mary; but when He was in Jerusalem, 
His proper home was the temple. There is no better way 


48 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


for a boy to be about His Father’s business than to early 
consecrate himself to God and learn of His Father's Word 
by being in His Father’s house. 

“They understood not.” The parents did not fully com- 
prehend the meaning of their Son. ‘The great lesson for 
us is that we should be doing everything we do as unto 
the Lord, and that folks should understand that whether 
we be in school, in the home, or in business, we should be 
so conducting our life that it will be well pleasing to God 
and will be in accord with God’s plan for us. 


§17,. Eighteen Years at Nazareth. Luke 2: 51, 52. 


51. “Came to Nazareth.” ‘This was His home until He 
went forth on His mission. ‘Was subject to them,” to 
both His mother and Joseph. He was doubtless obedient, 
helpful and ready to do anything that was placed in His 
hand to do. The fact that Christ, who was so superior, 
was in such willing subjection to His parents and lived 
such a helpful life, is a lesson to children of our day. As 
children, we should learn to do things even though they 
are not suited to our tastes if they will contribute to the 
happiness of those about us. It is quite certain that Joseph 
died some time before the public ministry of our Lord 
began. Mark 6:3 tells us that Jesus was a carpenter, hence 
we have reason to believe He had the care of and likely 
the support of His widowed mother. Thus He exalted and 
ennobled toil. “His mother kept all these sayings,” etc. 
She was doubtless interested in seeing how they would un- 
fold in His life. Boys and girls should remember with 
what keen interest their parents observe them and should 
seek in some way, through love and obedience, to repay 
their parents for the attention given to them in their tender 
years. 

52. “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature.’ We can 
imagine what a marvelous character the youth Jesus was, 
how He was lovely as well as strong and faithful. He 
never yielded to temptation. The victories of His life not 
only gave Him the love of His Father, but must have 
marked Him among His fellows as most unusual. “In 
favor with God.” Inasmuch as He was entirely submissive 


THE THIRTY YEARS OF PRIVATE LIFE 49 


to God, and hence in Him the Father was always well 
pleased, the first aim of every child and youth should be 
to have his conduct such as God would approve. ‘In favor 
with man.” Pure religion, so long as it does not bring us 
into conflict with the opinions of those about us, will have 
such a good effect upon us that it will make us more ac- 
ceptable to men. Those who do not indulge in sin will be- 
come more beautiful and attractive even to worldly people. 
There is an ideal to which most people are aspiring, which 
they may see realized in you, if you are being conformed 
to the image of Christ. 





PARE SIL 
The Opening Events of Christ's Ministry 


' a ois oe 


ee + 


ales), 


' . y : 
TMA a oy 





THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S 
MINISTRY 


§18. The Ministry of John the Baptist. Mat. 3:1- 
12; Mark 1:1-8; Luke 3: 1-20. 


“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the son 
of God.” This is Mark’s introductory sentence to the most 
unique record ever written. Yet we are not able to under- 
stand the Gospel story unless we know of him of whom 
Jesus Himself said, “Among them that are born of women 
there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist.” 

Luke tells us just when “the word of the Lord came unto 
John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness” (Luke 3:2). 
By Luke’s accurate placing of the Baptist with respect to 
the rulers of that day (Luke 3:1-2) we are able to con- 
trast earth’s conditions with that “Kingdom of heaven” 
which John announced (Mat. 3:2). Here also at the 
very beginning of John’s ministry we have a description 
of the type of life led by John, who ushered in “Such a re- 
vival as the world has probably never seen.”—A. B. Simp- 
SON. 

What was the world of John’s day? It was a world on 
the downgrade. “The reign of Augustus marked, not only 
the climax, but the crisis of Roman history.” In politics, 
philosophy, religion and society the limit had been reached. 
One man ruled the world. Under him was an army of 
340,000 men. He headed the Senate. He was the High 
Priest of religion which apotheosized the Emperor. Luxury 
and misery were side by side in Imperial Rome. Slavery 
was the bane of a people once noted for hardihood. Luxury 
and vice abounded. 

Stoicism which “flattered its pride’ and Epicureanism 
which “gratified its sensuality’ were the ruling forms of 
thought. Only Cicero defended the immortality of the 
soul, and he in a mild way. And if no life beyond death, 
why not indulge the passions? Religion necessarily was 

53 


54 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


at alow ebb. “The only religion insisted on by the Roman 
State was the worship of the Emperor.” The vilest crea- 
tures were apotheosized. We can imagine the state of a 
religion that prayed for the death of a rich relative; the 
satisfaction of unnatural lusts and blasphemed when such 
prayers were unanswered. On the tomb of a child was 
found: “To the unjust gods who robbed me of life”; on 
the tomb of a girl of twenty: “I lift my hands against the 
god who took me away, innocent as I am.” 

Indecency was worshipped. Conscience as we know it 
did not exist. “Might was right.” Marriage became rare 
because of female dissoluteness. “Abortion and the ex~- 
posure of newly born babes’ were common. Even the 
philosophers engaged in vice. Heartlessness was common. 
Sick and old slaves were cast aside to die. There were no 
hospitals. The only escape for those tired of life was 
suicide! Human hope had vanished. “Seneca longed for 
some hand from without to lift up from the mire of de- 
spair.” Cicero saw that the true embodiment of virtue 
would be hailed enthusiastically on earth. Tacitus thought 
that life was a farce and that Rome was. cursed. 

To such a world John proclaimed “The Kingdom of 
God.’ Edersheim points out a synchronism that to him 
seems quite as remarkable and challenging to the reverent 
student as the star of the East, and the birth of the Mes- 
siah. ‘On the 19th of December, A. D. 69, the Roman 
capital with its ancient sanctuaries was set on fire. Eight 
months later on the ninth of Ab. A. D. 70, the temple of 
Jerusalem was given to the flames. It is not a coincidence 
but a conjunction, for upon the ruins of heathenism and 
of Apostate Judaism was the Church of Christ to be 
reared.” 

So John the Baptist, the son of a priest, had likely been 
educated early in life, and then had gone to a life of se- 
clusion in the desert, where he had enjoyed lonely fellow- 
ship with God preparatory to his great ministry though 
he had been filled with the Holy Spirit from lus mother’s 
womb. John, “the messenger,” who went before the face 
of Christ that he might “make ready the way of the Lord” 
was peculiarly fitted to be “the voice” announcing the com- 


THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 55 


ing of the King. And should not his message have been 
heeded? Was not Judea galling under the yoke of Rome— 
according to the rabbis, the fourth beast of Daniel’s vision? 
Would not the “kingdom of heaven” or “kingdom of God” 
have been preferred to that of the “Great and Terrible 
Beast’’? | 

Tiberius Cesar (Luke 3:1) was no mild ruler in re- 
spect to the Jews as was Augustus. “Merciless harshness 
characterized the administration of Palestine.” The Em- 
peror was hostile to the Jews. Caiaphas, the high priest, 
was a tool of Roman tyranny. Pontius Pilate, governor 
of Judea, set aside the religious scruples of the Jews. 

Now John appeared on such a scene to announce a king- 
dom, happy and glorious, “even beyond the dreams of the 
religious enthusiast.” Little wonder the prophetic appear- 
ing and Nazarite-living John, the prophet of the desert, 
attracted the crowds to his ministry. For John gave them 
promise of the approach of “The Kingdom of God” that 
might be entered by repentance and baptism. Edersheim 
analyzes 119 passages in the New Testament where the 
expression “Kingdom” occurs and gathers that it means the 
rule of God, which was mantfested in and through Christ 
1s apparent in the Church, gradually develops amidst hin- 
drances, is triumphant at the Second Coming of Christ, 
and finally perfected in the world to come. John called 
upon the Jews to submit to the reign of God about to be 
manifested in Christ. The outward mode of entrance into 
this “Kingdom” was through baptism, by which proselytes 
had become Jews. It was the route of humiliation. 


I. Wuat JoHN PREACHED 


Verse 7. “The multitude.” There were so many that 
Mat. 3:5 states that “Jerusalem, and all Juda, and all the 
region round about Jordan” went out to him. “Came forth 
to be baptized of him.” Dr. Alexander says that John’s 
baptism was a ceremonial washing which denoted a pro- 
fession of repentance. In the warm climate of the East 
the washing away of the dust which naturally collects upon 
the body tends to lighten the spirit and so bring refresh- 
ment and happiness. Hence the Orientals should appreci- 


56 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


ate the significance of being plunged into and brought out 
from the water. ‘The open confession necessary in baptism 
is surely an aid to the spiritual life within. ‘Generation 
of vipers.” ‘The viper was the venomous serpent. Prob- 
ably John was thinking of the malignity, craft and deceit- 
fulness, and doubtless the deadly poison that was inoculated 
with the spirit of those that had come to him. Abbott says 
that this was especially addressed to the Pharisees and 
Sadducees (Mat. 3:5). Surely there is a sense in which 
this would apply to all sinners. ‘Who hath warned you 
to flee?” The forerunner of Christ was indignant when he 
saw the people seeking what might lead them to feel they 
could evade their duty by being baptized, when they should 
have repented. ‘From the wrath to come.” The Bible 
frequently refers to the wrath to come for sin. Such state- 
ments as “Our God is a consuming fire” and “The wicked 
shall be turned into Hell” indicate the justice of God to 
be meted out in the form of anger upon the sinner. 

Verse 8. “Bring forth fruits.” Their lives were to show 
the results of the change that had been wrought within 
them. Any tree may be known by its fruits, so the life is 
known by the deeds. “Worthy of repentance.” If they 
had repented before this, the works of the flesh would not 
have been so pronounced, but they would rather have been 
bearing the fruits of the Spirit (see Galatians 5: 19-23). 
“Abraham to our father.’”’ The Jews counted upon their 
relation to Abraham. Plumptre says, “Men imitate these 
Jews who trust in any forms of religion or pious parents 
or church going for the hope of salvation.” ‘God is able 
... to raise up children unto Abraham.” John wanted to 
disabuse their minds so that they would not continue to 
base their faith upon the wrong foundation. The fact is 
that the Lord would set aside the Jews and give the Gen- 
tiles, publicans and sinners their day of grace while the 
Jews were scattered throughout the world, where they are 
still wandering in partial blindness. | 

Verse 9. ‘The axe is laid upon the root of the trees.” 
Says Saddler, “It is as if a wood cutter had been to some 
noble tree of the forest and had laid the axe at its roots 
ready to fell it, but had gone away for some reason and 














THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 57 


it had a short respite.”’ It was very true that the Jewish 
nation was doomed, but the Lord Jesus was giving them 
grace. The history of the captivity teaches us that there 
does come a time when doom is certain. Let us embrace 
the opportunities of grace lest this unfavorable day over- 
take us. ‘Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit 
is hewn down.” The character of the fruit of an individual 
life or a nation’s life indicates the destiny of that people 
or person. ‘This principle obtains—If the tree is evil, the 
fruit will be evil and both will be destroyed. Only a radi- 
cal change of life through the new birth and the infilling 
of the Holy Spirit will warrant our being spared from the 
wrath of the Judge which sits at the door. 


Il. Tue Errect of JoHN’s PREACHING 


Verse 10. “What shall we do?” His message had such 
an effect upon his hearers that they were eager to do that 
which was necessary to keep them from being hewn down 
and cast into the fire. 

Verse 11. “He answered .. . he that hath two coats,” 
etc. ‘This coat was an outer garment. Even though a 
man were so poor that he had but two, he could spare one 
of these and give it to him who had none. “He that hath 
meat . . . do likewise.” Paul (2 Cor. 8:13-15), James 
(Jas. 2: 15-17), and John (1 John 3:17) gave the same 
teaching which they had learned from the spirit of the 
Master.—Cambridge Bible. 

Verse 12. “Publicans.” Tax gatherers. The Roman 
government leased out the collection of its taxes to spec- 
ulators who farmed this work out to subordinate collectors. 
There was a great deal of extortion in this business be- 
cause the temptation was great and the weak yielded to 
their desire for money. cf. Zacchzus. 

Verse 13. “Exact no more than that which is appointed 
you.” Each publican was supposed to supply simply what 
justice required regardless of what the other collectors 
were doing. This reformation in the conduct of the ones 
who desired to be righteous would naturally bring upon 
them the hatred of the extortioners. When one begins to 


58 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


do right he is apt to be severely criticized by those who con- 
tinue in wrongdoing. 

Verse 14. “And the soldiers.” The soldiers were armed 
policemen who had the opportunity of robbing and doing 
violence in general to people. ‘They were asked to accuse 
no man falsely. ‘They did this in order that they might 
have an opportunity of robbing them. ‘They were exhorted 
to be content with their wages lest they should feel like 
getting gain in unjust ways. None of these classes was 
exhorted to leave the world, but all were expected to live 
justly in the world. Such is the expectation today. If 
God expects us so to do, surely He Himself indwelling 
within us in the person of the Holy Spirit is the enable- 
ment for this kind of living. 

Verse 15. “The people were in expectation . . . mused 
in their hearts of John whether he were the Christ.” 
Schaff says, ‘““This shows the deep impression made by 
John as well as the general expectation that the Messiah — 
would speedily come.” 

Verse 16. ‘I indeed baptize you with water.” John in- 
dicated that he could simply perform the outward ceremony. 
This is all that any minister of religion can do. He does 
this as the agent or instrument of the Godhead. “One 
mightier.”” Reference is here made to the omnipotent Son 
of God. ‘“‘Latchet of whose shoes.” This was the thing 
that fastened the sandals. “I am not worthy to unloose.” 
“This office was performed,” says Ripley, “by the lowest 
servants,” as even John, who is recognized as being so 
great, was unworthy to loosen the sandals of the Messias. 
How great must have been the estimate of Jesus in the 
eyes of the Baptist! “Baptize you with the Holy Ghost 
and with fire.” Fire is symbolical of the Holy Spirit in 
that it purifies the dross from human nature and brings 
warmth, light and life to_the soul. 

Verse 17. “Whose fan is in his hand.” This fan was 
a broad wooden shovel with which the grain was tossed 
into the breeze so that the light chaff might be blown away 
from the heavier wheat. “TI will thoroughly cleanse.” That 
is, separate the good from the bad. “His floor.’ In those 
days they used a hard beaten piece of ground for the thresh- 





THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 59 


ing floor. Just as the thresher would see to it that the 
chaff was all separated from the wheat, nothing but the 
pure grain would remain, so John indicated Christ would 
be thorough in His dealing with men. “Will gather the 
wheat... but the chaff he will burn.” Evidently reference 
is here made to the fact that the righteous will be gathered 
into the kingdom of heaven and that the wicked will be 
destroyed with fire unquenchable. We note that John’s 
message was clear and forceful, and we little wonder that 
such words coming from this most extraordinary character 
carried with them such tremendous weight. 


§19. The Baptism of Jesus. Mat. 3:13-17; Mark 1: 
9-11; Luke 3: 21, 22 (23a). 


The fact of Jesus’ baptism is seldom denied. The reason 
is a matter of discussion. Various theories have been ad- 
vanced. We list them in brief. First, His mother desired 
Him to do it just as she had seen to it that He was circum- 
cised. Second, collusion with John to “help out’? John. 
Third, as a representative of the race. Fourth, in order 
to separate Him from Israel. Fifth, a surrendering to the 
coming death of Calvary. Sixth, to honor John’s baptism. 
Seventh, that the token of His Messiahship might appear. 


» Here we may think of that “dove descent” understood by 


John the Baptist. Eighth, commencement of His Mes- 
sianic work. Ninth, consecration to His life work. ‘Tenth, 
to be spiritually qualified. Eleventh, to avail Himself of 
John’s influence. But I like the idea that whatever may 
have been Jesus’ conception of being baptized of John, the 
result was that a new conception of Messianic conscious- 
ness dawned on Him. He did what He knew was God’s 
will for Him (Heb. 10:7) and heaven spoke its approval. 
By this baptism John, who knew enough of Jesus that he 
realized the futility of baptizing Him unto repentance, 
learned truly that Christ was God’s Son. By Jesus sub- 
mitting to this external ordinance John learned by external 
sign, “a dove,” that Jesus was the looked for Messiah, and 
then John testified unequivocally. Who knows what im- 
pression was made on Christ’s mind by the ‘“‘Descent of the 
Holy Spirit” on Him at the Jordan? 


60 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§20. The Temptation in the Wilderness. Mat. 4: 1- 
11; Mark 1:12, 13; Luke 4: 1-13. 


The temptation of Jesus was analogous to that of Eve 
in the Garden of Eden. It is outlined in 1 John 2:16. 
“For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the 
lust of the eyes and the pride of life, which is not of the 
Father but is of the world.” Robert McQuilken has 
pointed out that the appeal was made to physical desire, 
covetousness, and pride. It is a matter of regretable his- 
tory that the woman yielded to the tempter in Eden and 
that the first Adam took of the forbidden fruit and ate. 
We praise God that it is also a matter of glorious history 
that the second Adam resisted the temptation. Theolo- 
gians have discussed the inability of Christ to sin. The 
question is, Could He have sinned or not? While we in 
this study do not have occasion or space to discuss this 
question fully, yet we praise God the divine human Saviour 
never sinned. He manifested to all men that He is a suf- 
ficient Saviour from sin because He Himself, though in 
human form, passed through these great temptations with- 
out sin. It is our great privilege to have Christ so formed 
in us that we may constantly claim Him as the victorious 
One in our lives when we are in the presence of temptation. — 


I. THE OCCASION OF THE TEMPTATION. LuKE 4:1, 2 


Verse 1. “Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost.” The 
Holy Spirit had descended upon Christ immediately after 
His baptism. ‘Was led by the Spirit.” The imperfect 
tense used here indicates that Jesus was continually led of 
the Spirit. This one verb gives us a clue to the victorious 
life of Christ. He was always occupied with the things 
of the Spirit. Mark says, “Immediately the Spirit driveth 
him” or hurrieth Him forth. He was, by the Spirit, thrust 
into temptation. We note that He did not seek it Himself 
and hence was in no sense presumptuous. This should be 
the character of our conduct always with reference to 
temptation. Unless impelled by the Spirit of God, it is 
not brave, but foolhardy, to go into the presence of tempta- 
tion. ‘Wilderness.’ This word indicates the solitude of 


THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 61 


Jesus. He was absent from any possible human com- 
panionship or aid. Mark says He was “with wild beasts.” 
Thus He was left alone to fight through. 

Verse 2. “Forty days tempted.” It is quite probable that 
during the entire period He was constantly, or from time 
to time, tempted by the devil. We need not presume that 
this was the first time Jesus was ever tempted, but it is 
quite evident that Satan struck his hardest blows during 
these days and likely the three peculiar temptations cited 
in this section of Scripture were the final. “The devil.” 
The Greek word means slanderer or accuser and conveys 
the idea of deceit, calumny and accusation. From other 
Scriptures, such as Jude 6, we gather that he is a created 
being of a very high order but fallen from God. He was 
once in heaven (2 Peter 2:4). He can assume an inviting 
appearance (2 Cor. 11:13). He is very powerful (Eph. 
6:12) and is bent upon the destruction of man, whom he 
blinds (2 Cor. 4:4). The question is sometimes raised 
as to whether the temptation of Christ was objective or 
subjective. If it were objective, then Satan actually took 
Him to the pinnacle of the temple and enabled Him to 
have an outline view of the kingdoms of the world. If it 
were subjective, Satan brought these things to His con- 
sciousness. [he common view is that Satan actually ap- 
peared to Jesus. We are sure that he did not appear to 
Him as Satan but rather as an angel of light. Satan comes 
to each of us, not as Appolyon came to Bunyan’s pilgrim, 
but he comes to us in attractive garb. Peloubet says that 
he comes not in the sparkle of the wine cup, but in the dregs. 


Il. Tur THreE TEMPTATIONS 
1. The Temptation to Physical Appetite (2-4) 


Verse 2. “He did eat nothing.” The Cambridge Bible 
says that in times of intense spiritual exaltation, the ordi- 
nary needs of the body are almost suspended. He did not 
feel hungry. Godet says this follows from the words “He 
afterward hungered.” ‘There have been instances of forty 
day fasts other than this. “He afterward hungered.” Re- 
action began and hunger seized Him. It was for this 


™62 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


moment that Satan had been waiting. He seized what 
seems to him to be his opportunity of shipwrecking the 
hope of the race. 

Verse 3. “The devil said.” Satan made his severest at- 
tacks when Jesus was weakest. He is not a fair opponent, 
but attacks us when we are weary, sick, troubled, disheart- 
ened or nervously depleted. “If thou be the son of God.” 
The original indicates that this was sarcasm on the part 
of Satan. The verse might be quoted, ‘Since you are the 
son of God,” that is, “Since you are so sure you are, com- 
mand this stone,’ etc. Satan was challenging Christ in 
the time of His physical weakness. ““This stone .. . bread.” 
Farrar says that there were stones there the exact shape of 
little loaves of bread. One might superficially think that 
nothing would have been wrong in the doing of this on the 
part of Jesus, but since Christ had voluntarily submitted 
to all the conditions under which we are, He could not as- 
sume a divine prerogative on such an occasion, but rather 
as a man, depended upon God for the things necessary to 
support His life. Had He done what Satan suggested, He 
would have given the lie to the reality of His humanity. 

Verse 4. “It is written.” Someone has said that when 
Jesus uttered His first word of His public ministry, He 
used the Word of God as an instrument. “If Christ,” as 
Lightfoot says, “made the Scripture His rule, though He 
had the fulness of the Spirit above measure,” how much 
more ought we to rightly divide and fully depend upon the 
sure word of prophecy as our weapon of defence. ‘‘Man 
shall not live by bread alone.” Other things are just as 
important and more so than bread. It is better not to eat 
bread at all than to do it through the violation of the prin- 
ciples of honesty, truth and holiness. When we think of 
how Eve ate of the forbidden fruit because it was shown 
to be “good for food,” and when we contemplate how the 
race has yielded to “the lust of the flesh,’ we the more 
appreciate the divine Son of God who came in human 
form. How eager we should be to appropriate Him lest 
we, to simply gratify an appetite, commit great sin. “By 
every word of God.” The reference here is probably to 
the fact that we should recognize our dependence upon the 





THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY = 63.» 


will of God as expressed through His Word. When God 
speaks it is done and His word will mean that we are given 
food from heaven even as the Israelites were given manna. 
Then He, through His Word, sustains us spiritually, and 
it is more important that we live spiritually than physi- 
cally. We praise God that Jesus conquered and we realize 
the pertinency of John’s exhortation that we are not to 
love the world, which includes the things that satisfy the 
lust of the flesh. 


2. The Temptation to Covetousness (5-8) 


Verse 5. “The devil taketh him up into a high moun- 
tain.’”’ Whether Jesus literally went up or was taken up in 
spirit, the vision must have been supernatural. ‘Showed 
him all the kingdoms.” Godet says, “It is not said that 
Jesus really saw all the kingdoms... but that Satan showed 
them to Him in instantaneous succession by a diabolical 
phantasmagoria. He had seen so many great men succumb 
to a similar mirage that he might well hope to prevail again 
_ by this means.” 
| ‘Verse 6. “All this power will I give thee.” Can we 
_ imagine what wealth, rank, military and governmental 
| power was represented in this scene? Satan doubtless 
_ hoped that Jesus as Messianic monarch would undertake 
_ to use these powers to set up an earthly kingdom. More 
_ than one great world monarch has been brought under the 
_ domination of his Satanic majesty. “The glory of them.” 
_ In this temptation Satan practically offered Christ the whole 
world. Jesus must have known, as He could have known 
_ even from prophecy, that one day He would rule the world. 
_ How we admire the strength of His patience in that He 

was willing to bide His time rather than attempt to grasp 

something within His reach prematurely. Had Jesus taken 
up the offer of Satan, He would have pleased the Jews, 
who were looking for Him as the Messiah to set up a tem- 
poral kingdom. Let Jesus be our example in that we want 
nothing until God’s time, and when His time comes, no one 
can keep us from having what we should receive. ‘That 
is delivered. unto me.” ‘This was actually a lie. The fact 
was that Satan had usurped the rulership of the world by 





64 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


getting into the hearts of the rulers of temporal kingdoms. 
Ellicott says, “The rulers of the world, its Herods and its 
Czesars, seem to have attained their eminence by trampling 
the laws of God under foot and accepting the devil as the 
lord and master of the world.” A knowledge of Satan’s 
power enables us to understand how wicked men often 
prosper for a time. This was an enigma to David until 
he went into the sanctuary of the Most High. 

Verse 7. “Worship me.” It is certainly clear that Satan 
did not simply mean that Jesus was to bow in his presence 
and perform a bald act of worship, but rather he wanted 
Christ to yield to his plan and look up to him with an in- 
ward reverence. ‘Satan,’ says Peloubet, “is too shrewd 
to insist on form if he can gain the heart.” The form may 
follow, however. Many men worship Satan by worship- 
ping money, fame, or even pleasure. ‘The Scriptures state 
that we cannot serve God and mammon. Hence if we serve 
anything else than God, we are serving the enemy of God, 
that is, the devil. 

Verse 8. “Get thee behind me”; that is, stand out of my 
way. “It is written.” Jesus again uses the Word of God. 
“Thou shalt worship the Lord.” The first and greatest 
commandment. God has made the world and man in His 
own glory. When man worships anything else then the 
whole system is thrown out of joint. When man worships 
God, things are right. Heaven will be perfect because 
there all will honor and worship God. 


3. The Temptation to Pride (9-13) 


Verse 9. “The pinnacle of the temple.” Probably the 
southern portico which looked down at a fearful height of 
about 600 feet into the valley of Hinnon. Josephus says 
that the eye looked down from it into an abyss. “If thou 
be the son of God, cast thyself down.” This would have 
been a spectacular performance and would have attracted 
the attention of the Jews. The temptation is quite clear 
when we consider that had Jesus been borne up on angels’ 
wings in such a temptation, natural pride would have been 
gratified. Satan was tempting Jesus to be presumptuous 
in order that He might glorify Himself and so yield to the 











THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 65 


“pride of life.’ The Jews would the more likely be ready 
to accept Him as king if they would witness His perform- 
ing this unusual feat. Satan often assails the believer by 
prompting him to undertake that which is not based upon 
good sense or faith. 

Verse 10. “He shall give His angels charge over thee.” 
Satan also quotes the Scripture from Psalm 91:11, but he 
misapplies it. Jesus knew that He was not warranted in 
claiming God’s care if He did something out of the will 
and plan of the Father. Satan today uses the Scripture, 
but we should beware of his application of it. 

Verse 12. “It is said.” From the Word of God, Jesus 
showed that Satan had misapplied the Scripture. 

Verse 13. “When the devil had ended all the tempta- 
tion.” When he had used all his wiles to worst the divine 
Son of God, but had signally failed. ‘‘Departed from him 
for a season.” The original indicates until a convenient 
opportunity had afforded. Satan did not leave Jesus 
finally. In Gethsemane he met Him again. ‘The believer 
must not conclude if he has had a great victory that he will 
never again be tempted or tested. Satan will come in dif- 
ferent guises and on different occasions. 


§ 21. John’s Testimony Before the Priests and Levites. 
John 1: 19-28. 


John the Baptist was a challenging figure. He was not 
a Pharisee, for he dwelt not on externalism in religion. He 
was not of the Essenes, the ascetics of his day, who empha- 
sized ‘merely material purism.” He taught a doctrine of 
inwardness and reality. He prepared the way for true 
worshippers who worship the Father in spirit and in truth. 

Evidently John had a knowledge of the Messiah as re- 
vealed by Isaiah the Prophet, whom he quotes in verse 23. 
When we contemplate that John had an ideal gathered from 
Isaiah’s conception of Him who was to come (cf. Isa. 9:6; 
42; 52; 13; 53 and 61) we readily understand that ‘This 
explains that the greatest of those born of women was also 
the most humble, the most retiring, and self-forgetful. In 
a picture such as that which filled his vision there was no 
oat ane self.” —Edersheim. To John the suggestion that 


66 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


he was the Christ must have sounded blasphemous. He 
finally asserts that he is not worthy to perform that “mean- 
est office which a slave could discharge”; viz., the unloosing 
of the latchets of Christ’s shoes. 

The questions of this delegation have been looked upon 
as a series of temptations to John, even as Christ met many 
temptations in the wilderness, and John did not yield as 
Christ did not. When he would not admit he was Christ 
then he was forced to face the fact that he was not Elijah 
nor even “the prophet.” He was simply “a voice.” 

Now as to John being Elijah, the angelic announcement 
had said “He shall go before him in the power and spirit 
of Elias” (Luke 1:17). And as Jesus sadly reviewed 
John’s life He said, “Elias is already come, and they knew 
him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed”’ 
(Mat. 17:12). But the Jews did not recognize and receive 
John as Elijah. So he could not “restore all things.” ‘The 
Elijah of Ahab’s day sought an outward restoration. But 
“the spirit and power” of Elijah of the New Testament 
sought an imward restoration. Penitence was demanded. 
So though John was “Divinely Elijah,” he was not really 
Elijah to Israel—and this is the meaning of the words of 
Jesus: “And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was 
for to come” (Mat. 11:14). 

Then there was the expectation of “that prophet” fore- 
told in Deut. 18:15, 18. But John flatly denied claim even 
to this humbler title. 

When asked why he baptized if he were neither Christ, 
nor Elijah, nor the “prophet,” John simply asserted that he 
baptized in water but a greater than he was in their very 
mee known by John to baptize with the Holy Ghost (John 

[3))s 


§ 22. Jesus, the Lamb of God. John 1: 29-34. 


Here is the witness of John the Baptist that Jesus is the 
“Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.” 
John sees in Him the Antitype of all those sacrifices out- 
lined in the sacrificial systems. But best of all John rec- 
ognizes that through Him the dark curtain of sin, that 
hides God’s face from the world, will be rolled back. He 


THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 67 


sees in Christ the “Scape-goat of the race” (verse 29). 
Then John reminds his hearers (verse 30) that he had 
prophesied of Him whom he now points out. He had re- 
ferred to Him as a man (aner), a hero, an outstanding 
character, who though six months younger than John and 
subsequent to him in beginning His ministry, yet this Jesus 
“has become” before John, for says John, He was “first 
in regard of me.” This is the Baptist’s way of magnifying 
Christ. Then amazing words, John says (verse 31), “I 
knew him not.” Though they had been cousins yet their 
lives had been lived apart that John’s testimony might have 
greater weight. John’s whole ministry of baptizing with 
water, however, was to the intent that Jesus might be mani- 
fest to Israel. Then (verses 32-34) John gives his per- 
sonal testimony as to Christ based upon a revelation vouch- 
safed to him at Jesus’ baptism. ‘The dove form of the 
Spirit descended out of heaven and on Jesus abode, and 
although John had not known Him in life so as to have the 
fact of His Messiahship dawn on him, yet he was assured 
that Jesus was the Son of God because of His heavenly 
phenomenon. For He that had sent John to baptize with 
water had said unto him, ‘Upon whomsoever thou shalt 
see the Spirit descending and abiding upon him, the same 
is he that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit.” The dove from 
heaven was a supernatural revelation to John that Jesus 
was the Christ, the Son of God. 


§ 23. The First Three Disciples. John 1: 35-42, 


Edersheim makes something of the days of these events. 
He believes that the interview between John and the San- 
hedrin took place on Thursday. On Friday John first testi- 
fied to the “Lamb of God.” The following day Jesus ap- 
peared a second time, and the two disciples followed Him. 
This was Saturday, Jewish Sabbath. Then on Sunday, the 
next day, Jesus returned to Galilee, calling others along the 
way. ‘The significance of this is all clear. ‘The Friday 
of John’s first pointing to Jesus as the Lamb of God, which 
taketh away the sin of the world, recalls that other Friday, 
when the full import of that testimony appeared.” Cruci- 


68 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


fixion Day, our “Good Friday.” The Sabbath symbolizes 
the old economy, closes the ministry of John and opens 
that of Jesus (John 1:35, 36). Two of John’s disciples 
take leave of John and follow their new Master. ‘Then 
follows Sunday, when Christ begins His active ministry 
(John 1:43). 

It is interesting to observe how perfectly naturally 
Andrew and John (for he is the other one of the “two” 
disciples referred to in verse 37) went after Jesus, whom 
they recognized as Master, Rabbi or Teacher. “Come and 
ye shall see” was a rabbinnic formula. By it Jesus admitted 
them to His teaching. 

Andrew lost no time in finding his brother Simon and 
in bringing him to Jesus, who scrutinized him closely and 
then gave him that name (Cephas, Peter) of which he 
ultimately became worthy. Andrew will always be the 
classical example of one who, though not prominent nor 
gifted himself, yet because he leads a brother to Christ who 
is greatly used, deserves praise and receives reward. 


§ 24. Philip and Nathanael. John 1: 43-51. 


Jesus decided to leave the Jordan for Galilee. He found 
Philip and bade him follow Him. Philip was of the same 
town as Andrew and Peter and like Andrew he sought out 
his own brother. His announcement, ‘‘We have found him 
of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, 
Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph,’ must have startled 
Nathanael, who naively asked, “Can any good thing come 
out of Nazareth?” To which question Philip confidently 
replied “Come and see.” 

Rather than being against Nathanael it was to his credit 
that he hesitated long enough to question Philip. Conjec- 
ture that Nathanael was looking for the Messiah. Would 
you have supposed that he would have expected a Messiah 
to come from Nazareth? And then to make the anti-climax 
yet more striking Philip had announced Him as the “son 
of Joseph.”” But Nathanael was willing to be shown. He 
was open for evidence. He approaches Jesus, who sees 
in him guilelessness. He is frank. Nathanael soon inter- 


THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 69 


rogates the Master as though to test Him. His “Whence 
knowest thou me?” is met with the prompt and, to Na- 
thanael, surprising reply, “Before Philip called thee, when 
thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.” This was enough 
for the frank Nathanael. At once he made his confession 
of faith. He saw and said he was in the presence of Him 
of whom he had heard. He addressed Him as “Rabbi. . . 
son of God . . . king of Israel.’”’ He was at once teacher, 
Deity and monarch. ‘Then Jesus explained to Nathanael 
how He saw the ground of his faith but that he would yet 
see greater things than these. There was yet much to be 
revealed to the unbiased mind of the unprejudiced Na- 
thanael. He would see the “Son of Man” as the avenue 
of communication between heaven and earth. Nathanael 
saw Him as Rabbi, King and Son of God. He was all 
this but He was just as truly Son of Man and as the God- 
man, the Bridge of the chasm between heaven above and 
earth beneath. So as Jacob realized because of the lad- 
der vision, that God was in the place, so Nathanael was yet 
to know that through Jesus angels, messengers, communi- 
cations were passing from earth to heaven and back again. 
All worship is through Christ. All prayers are offered in 
His name. We are accepted in the Beloved. 

Dr. Griffith Thomas uses John 1:51 as the basis for a 
message on “The Need, Means, Safety and Freedom of 
Communication Between God and Man.” His points are: 

1. Jesus Christ, a Man—Sympathy. 

2. Jesus Christ, a Perfect Man—Sinlessness. 

3. Jesus Christ, Died—Sacrifice. 

4. Jesus Christ, Rose—Common Sense Argument. 
(What became of the body ?) 

5. Jesus Christ, Ascended—“A Saviour, not quite God, is 
a Bridge broken at the other (Father’s) end.” 


§ 25. The First Miracle: Water Made Wine. John 
2:1-11. 
Nathanael, the naive Galilean, had confessed that Jesus 


was “Rabbi,” “Son of God,” and “King of Israel.” Na- 
thanael had recognized the greatness of Christ because the 


70 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Master had said, “Before Philip called thee, when thou 
wast under the fig tree, I saw thee’ (John 1:48). But 
Jesus informed Nathanael that there were yet greater 
things to see and speaking of Himself used the name, “Son 
of Man” (John 1:51). 

At the marriage feast of Cana we see Jesus both as Son 
of Man and also as God. He is here, on the occasion of 
His first miracle, very clearly the God-man,—He is God in 
power; He is a man in His gracing the wedding and 
mingling with His fellows at this occasion of gladness. 

We cannot but think of Him here in striking contrast to 
the ascetic John the Baptist. Possibly His attendance upon 
such occasions gave the whimsical, childish generation, that 
saw only superficially, an occasion to contrast Christ with 
John. “For John came neither eating nor drinking and 
they say, ‘He hath a devil.’ The Son of Man came eating 
and drinking and they say, ‘Behold a man gluttonous, and 
a wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.” Jesus 
made it evident that He ‘became man.” As P. Whitwell 
Wilson in The Christ We Forget says, ‘Those who met 
Him in the flesh never doubted that He was Man. They 
brought Him food and begged Him to eat, and they put a 
pillow for Him that He might sleep in the boat,” etc. 

That Jesus should have been at the Wedding Feast was 
quite natural. He, with His newly chosen disciples, had 
come from Bethabara to Nazareth and Cana of Galilee. The 
former place was His own home and the latter that of Na- 
thanael. His mother attended the wedding. Nathanael, a 
prominent citizen, was invited and why should not Jesus, 
the Rabbi, attend? For a wedding was more than festiv- 
ities and merriment. Before it the pious fasted. Indeed 
it was “almost a sacrament” with the Jews. Entrance into 
the marriage state was thought by some to carry with it 
forgiveness of sins. ‘Then in the background of the con- 
sciousness of every Jew there was the conception that Je- 
hovah was the Groom of Israel just as we today refer as 
Christians to Christ and His Bride. | 

“To use the bold allegory of the times, God Himself had 
spoken the words of blessing over the cup at the union of 
our first parents, when Michael and Gabriel acted as grooms- 


THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 71 


men, and the angelic choir sang the wedding hymn.’— 
Edersheim. | 

So a wedding combined sanctity and gladness. It was 
preceded by the betrothal, which was practically as binding 
as the wedding. It was advised that a betrothed couple 
should marry in twelve months. The Scripture used to 
show that “engagements” should terminate in marriage 
within a year was Prov. 13:12. “Hope” should not be 
“deferred” lest the heart become sick. 

The wedding procession was quite a pageant, at the close 
of which the contract or Kethubah was signed. The bride- 
groom promised “to work for, honor, keep and care for 
his bride,’ and to give her 200 Zuz (about $30). The 
cup was filled and a solemn prayer of bridal benediction 
was offered. Then there followed the feast, to which all 
present made some contribution ‘“‘sometimes coarsely, some- 
times wisely, to the general enjoyment.” 

At such a feast “the wine failed” (verse 3). Mary in- 
formed Jesus of the embarrassment, and was met with, 
“Woman what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not 
yet come.” On such occasions it was regarded as a “meri- 
torious work of charity” to provide wine. Was the mother 
of Jesus simply getting her Son to contribute some wine? 
Rather more than that. She was eagerly awaiting His 
“hour.” Some have ventured that she saw in this lack of 
wine an opportunity for “His Royal Messianic manifesta- 
tion.” But Jesus did not go into collusion with her on the 
matter, nor should His reply to her be interpreted as a re- 
buff. We cannot imagine anything discourteous in the 
conduct of Christ and least of all towards His mother, 
though a sword was to pierce her heart. Probably Jesus 
had performed no miracles prior to this. His mother really 
expected to see some manifestation at any time. She had 
confidence as well as pride in her Son “conceived by the 
Holy Ghost.” She knew His origin. Yet she was likely 
“taken back”? when He answered her with “What to me and 
to thee, woman?” What have we in common in this matter, 
Lady? It was as she had heard in the temple eighteen 
years earlier, “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's 
business?” Mary knew His meekness and home-submis- 


72 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


sion. She could not be blamed for expecting a continua- 
tion of that. Yet she had to learn what we, who are re- 
lated to Him in a spiritual way, must learn, that ‘“Father’s 
business” comes first. So there was nothing “harsh or 
derogatory” in the utterance of Jesus. He was simply 
taking the stand He later held. (See Mat. 12: 46-50.) 

What Mary herself faced as an insoluble problem was 
what has perplexed theologians down through the centuries ; 
viz., the nature of Christ. We say He was the God-man 
and marvel at the “mystery of Godliness.” In the early 
centuries of the Church Athanasius, Arius, Apollinaris, 
Nestorius, Cyril, Eutychus and others disputed over His 
nature. Church councils dogmatized and anathematized 
over this question. Hearts ached and heads swimmed. Yet 
He is still the marvel of the universe. New Lives of Christ 
are written. Each age or generation views Him in its own 
background. Yet He baffles all as He did Mary, His 
mother. 

At her bidding the servants were ready to comply with 
His wish which was “Fill the water-pots with water.” 
These huge jars used for purifying dishes and hands con- 
tained about seventeen gallons each. They filled six of 
them “to the brim.” ‘This made the miracle evident and 
without question. No essence of wine was in the bottom of 
those jars. “The servants which had drawn the water 
knew.” ‘They saw the sparkling water run over the brim. 
It was water, not wine. But, referring to the narrative, 
something happened between verses 7 and 8. When they 
drew out it was wine not water, and according to the ruler 
of the feast “good wine.” So good was it that the ruler 
indulged in a proverbial joke. Here was something un- 
usual, good wine at the close of the feast “when men had 
drunk freely.” 

This is like Jesus. He provides the good, the satisfying. 
He takes the water of our lives, our knowledge, our works, 
our prayers, our almsgiving, and He makes it wine. Our 
best is insipid, tasteless unless He transmute it into wine. 
Let us “fill the water pots to the brim.” He can bless much 
learning, great wealth, long prayers, large gifts. Throw all 
thy powers into the jar that He is about to bless. “With 


THE OPENING EVENTS OF CHRIST’S MINISTRY 73 


His divine alchemy He turns common things into radiant 
mysteries; yea, every meal into a eucharist and the jaws 
of the sepulchre into an outgoing gate.”—MacDonald. 

By this miracle “Jesus manifested His glory.” Little 
wonder that “His disciples believed on Him.” They saw 
and believed. Does not the record of this miracle stir our 
hearts to new, more active faith? 


§ 26. Sojourn in Capernaum. John 2: 12. 


Apparently Capernaum was the “chief home” of Jesus 
after He entered on His active work. On this occasion He 
stayed only a few days, for the Feast of the Passaver was 
at hand. 


hat 
fs i fs 
dhe ¥ 
‘ >» ede 


‘A 
‘ars 
ine 





BAR ECIHIE 
The Early Judean Ministry 


bei\ Mia Ae 


\ i, in oA 
4 “2 
Ts MOQ POU Le 
f i 


hin Ps 





THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 


FROM THE PuBLic APPEARANCE OF JESUS IN JERUSALEM 
Unit His Return To GALILEE 


§ 27. First Cleansing of the Temple John 2: 13-22. 


It seems fitting that Jesus should have begun His ministry 
with a cleansing of the temple. Some have argued that it 
was “abrupt” or “‘tactless” in Jesus to begin His ministry 
as John 2 describes and so believe that Matthew 21, Mark 
11 and Luke 19 refer to the same event as John 2. Luther 
was among these. But Edersheim is quite convinced that 
the “cleansing” belongs here. He says, “It is not only pro- 
fane, but unhistorical, to look for calculation and policy in 
_ the life of Jesus. Had there been such He would not have 
died on the cross.” This position takes it for granted that 
Jesus was about His Father’s business as at the age of 
twelve. He was ridding His Father’s house of a nefarious 
traffic. It had become a “den of robbers.” He was ful- 
filling the prophecy of Mal. 3: 1-3 (q.v.). A description 
of the crowd in the court of the Gentiles when Christ 
cleansed the temple is given by Giovanni Papini: 

“The dealers trampling in the mud test the flanks of the 
animals intended for sacrifice, and cry out in monotonous 
voices to the women who are come for purification after 
child birth, to the pilgrims come to offer a sacrifice of im- 
portance, and to the lepers who must offer live birds for 
their healing. The money lenders, who may be recognized 
by a coin they wear suspended from one ear, run their 
long and clutching fingers with voluptuous enjoyment 
through the shining, jingling heaps of coins before them; 
the agents wriggle in and out among the groups; men from 
the provinces, tight fisted and wary, hold long confabula- 
tions before untying their purse strings and handing over 
small coins in payment of their offerings; and from time 
to time the bellowing of an impatient ox drowns alike the 
plaintive bleating of the lambs, the high-pitched voices of 
the women, and the jingling of minae and shekels.”’ 

77 


78 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Though He with His scourge of cords drove out sheep 
and oxen and “poured into their receptacles the changers’ 
money and overthrew their tables’ yet no hand was raised 
against Him. He must have met with a silent response on 
the part of a knowing yet a remiss multitude who let the 
avaricious Priesthood go on. If others lacked executive 
power He did not. He could not be accused of moral 
laziness. ‘To Renan’s characterization of this as “a sudden, 
ill-advised outburst of ill-humor,” Edersheim replies, “It 
was a scene worth witnessing by any true Israelite, a pro- 
test and an act which, even among a less emotional people, 
would have gained Him respect, approbation and admira- 
tion and which, at any rate, secured His safety.” 


What Jesus condemned, but the Priesthood condoned, 
was the transforming of the temple into a market, in which 
boisterousness and unfair dealing prevailed. This went by 
the board with some because it was convenient to get exact 
change for the purchasing of articles needful for the feast 
in the way of sacrifices and what went with them, but the 
traffic brought in “the weighing of coins, deductions for 
loss of weight, arguing, disputing, bargaining.” Poor peo- 
ple who came to offer their sacrifices were taken advantage 
of. On one occasion a pair of pigeons was run up to 15s. 
Ba Or shoes 1. 

This market was doubtless ‘what in Rabbinic writings is 
styled ‘the bazaars of the sons of Annas’ . . . who is in- 
famous in New Testament History.” Owing to this traffic 
being so unpopular that the indignation of the people swept 
it away three years before the destruction of Jerusalem, 
Jesus could do what He did. Josephus describes Annas, 
son of Annas of the New Testament, as “a great hoarder 
up of money.” 

So the Jews, fearful of creating a tumult if they inter- 
rupted Christ and desiring also to appeal to the multitude, 
asked Him for a “sign” (verse 18). In this hateful, yet 
cowardly cunning, Jesus foresaw that which would send 
Him to the Cross, so He answered as we read in John 2: 
19. The Jews missed His meaning, but the disciples re- 
membered His words after the resurrection (John 2:22). 
His “sign” is His Victory though He was crucified. 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 79 


§ 28. Discourse With Nicodemus. John 2: 23-3: 21. 


At the occasion of this feast of Passover Jesus did 
miracles besides “cleansing the temple.” These miracles 
arrested the people and caused “many to believe on His 
name, beholding His signs’ (John 2:23). Yet Jesus did 
not confide in men for the very good reason that He knew 
it was unsafe so to do (John 2: 24, 25). 

Jesus perceived what has been called “Imperfect attach- 
ment to Christ” (John 12:9)—W. L. Watkinson. 


INTRODUCTION : 


People attached to Christ not altogether actuated by faith 
and devotion. 


1. But some are moved by curiosity. 
“See Lazarus.” 
Hear of unknown worlds from him. 
Christ a Prophet rather than Saviour. 
2. Influenced by custom. 
Fashion to be interested in Christ. John 12: 12-19. 
“Everybody’s doing it.” 
3. Decided by interest. 
Christ healed and fed. 
A lumber dealer sees so many feet of “Timber” 
rather than beauties of the forest. 
4. Charmed by taste. 
‘Moral excellence” of Christ perceived. 
Above “imperfect attachments’ may be “starting 
points” in the Christian life but starting only. 


Benjamin Franklin offered a lodging to Whitefield who 
said, “If you have done it for Christ’s sake, you'll not lose 
your reward.” Franklin replied, “I have not done it for 
Christ’s sake but for your sake.” 


Why are we in the Church? 
For Christ’s sake? 


We note with interest that Christ’s miracles attracted and 
won for Him recognition. Nowadays we hear much in re- 


80 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


gard to miracles. Many men today question the Scripture 
narrative simply because it contains miracles. What they 
cannot explain by their own “rules” and “formulas” and 
“test tubes” they will not concede to. But what is there in 
the mind of man that warrants his claiming the right to pass 
final judgment on the workings of God? Yet men have so 
attacked the miraculous in the Christian religion that what 
used to be the bulwark of our evidence, miracles, has to 
some become a ‘“‘charge” which we must defend. 

We rest, with Robert J. Drummond, in the conviction that 
“you cannot separate the miraculous from Jesus Christ.” 
With Him miracles are natural throughout. Peter ex- 
pressed the inevitableness of His resurrection in the words, 
“It is not possible that He should be holden of death.” 


Jesus came with “words” and with “works.” When 
they withstood His words He trusted they would believe 
“for the work’s sake.” And yet men need the works. Eder- 
sheim says, “They approached the moral and spiritual 
through the miraculous; we the miraculous through the 
moral and spiritual.” True it is that if the miraculous 
should become the ordinary the attractive power of the 
miracle would be lessened, if not lost. God may be believed 
in as well as Christ by a simple record of miracles, yet 
many, many today need the supernatural manifestation to 
make the message obvious. 

Nicodemus was among those who had seen Christ’s 
miracles. So this strict Pharisee and member of the San- 
hedrin, the highest ecclesiastical tribunal of the nation, 
“came unto Him by night.” 

Nicodemus has been variously estimated. $. D. Gordon 
in an article on “The Master’s Ideal Christian,” emphasizes 
his timidity on this occasion, and his fairness but feebleness 
when he asked the Sanhedrin the question of John 7:51. 
Wilson in “The Christ We Forget” writes “Peter, the 
fisherman, was ready to fling himself openly at the Saviour’s 
feet, whereas Nicodemus, the politician, came to Him by 
night, as if he must calculate consequences before publicly 
associating himself with a Teacher sent from God. Jesus 
believed not in night work but in day work. He suspected 
every deed of darkness. The cowardice of Nicodemus... .” 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY Sl 


And again, “This one timid trimmer stood forth alone.” 
Here reference is to John 7:51. Yet Wilson allows that 
Nicodemus learned from Jesus and admires his coming 
forth with Joseph of Arimathea to “honor a Friend, now 
defeated and discredited, and so taking his place on the 
losing side.”’ But this heroic deed was because “Christ had 
made a man of him, had cured his cowardice and corrected 
his opportunism.” 


But Edersheim, who, in the judgment of the writer, 
speaks more advisedly, says, “It is altogether rash to speak 
of the manner of his first approach to Christ as most com- 
mentators have done. We can scarcely realize the diffi- 
culties he had to overcome. It must have been a mighty 
power of conviction, to break down prejudice so far as to 
lead this old Sanhedrist to acknowledge a Galilean, un- 
trained in the Schools, as a ‘Teacher come from God,” and 
to repair to Him for direction on, perhaps, the most delicate 
and important point of Jewish theology. But, even so, we 
_cannot wonder that he should have wished to shroud his 
first visit in the utmost possible secrecy. It was a most 
compromising step for a Sanhedrist to take.” 


Doubtless not all their conversation is here recorded. 
Nicodemus recognized that He was “‘a teacher come from 
God” because of His miracles. He also addressed the 
Master most respectfully as Rabbi. Jesus was not excited 
nor was He unmanned in the least by His visitor from the 
Great Sanhedrin. He simply talked to Nicodemus frankly 
and helpfully. As a Pharisee Nicodemus “believed in a 
future state, studied the Scriptures, and was looking for the 
Messiah, whom he expected to be a temporal deliverer and 
king.”” He looked for the Kingdom of God but Jesus most 
emphatically introducing His utterance with “Verily, 
verily” (Amen, amen), said “except a man be born from 
above he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Would Nico- 
demus come to where “God reigns as king . . . where His 
will is law, and men obey it as naturally as they breathe, 
and where all His subjects are formed in His holy image, 
and inspired with His spiritual life,’ then he must “‘be born 
from above.’ Now “the Jewish view of the second birth 
was the consequence of having taken upon oneself ‘the 

6 


nlp CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Kingdom’; not as Jesus put it, the cause and the condition 
of it.’ Judaism knew nothing of a “moral renovation, a 
spiritual birth, as the initial condition for reformation, far 
less as that for seeing the kingdom of God.” Prof. Drum- 
mond, in his “Natural Law in the Spiritual World’ illus- 
trates this truth by the scientic doctrine of Biogenesis. 
“Only by means of new life imparted to it from a higher 
life can any object rise into the kingdom above it.” ‘The 
plant life takes to itself of the mineral kingdom and imparts 
to it vegetable life. The vegetable kingdom cannot be 
changed into the animal kingdom except through the im- 
parting to it of animal life. “Each lower kingdom must 
be born from that above.” God’s spiritual life given to our 
souls makes us children of God. 

Nicodemus knew only of the natural birth, hence his ques- 
tion of verse 4. Jesus’ reply (verse 5) informed Nicodemus 
that entrance into the Kingdom of God was conditioned by 
birth of the water and of the Spirit. Commenting on this 
passage Abbott says, “Governing ourselves by the cardinal 
canon, that we are to understand Christ as Christ expected 
His auditor to understand Him, it cannot be difficult to 
understand this declaration. The Jewish proselyte, as a 
sign that he put off his old faith, was baptized on entering 
the Jewish Church. John the Baptist, employing the sym- 
bolic rite, baptized Jew as well as Gentile, as a sign of 
purification by repentance from past sins. Nicodemus, then, 
would certainly have understood by Christ’s expression, 
“born of water,” a reference to this rite of baptism, and by 
the expression, “born of the Spirit,’ a reference to a new 
spiritual life. The declaration is then that no man can 
enter the Kingdom of God except by (1) a public acknowl- 
edgment and confession of sin, a public putting off of the 
old man and entering into the new; and (2) a real and 
vital change of life and character wrought by the Spirit of 
God in the heart of the believer. By the one act he enters 
into the visible and external kingdom, by the other into the 
spiritual and invisible kingdom.” This in general is the 
position taken by evangelical Christians on this passage. A 
parallel passage is Titus 3:5. ‘Not by works of righteous- 
ness which we have done, but according to his mercy he 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 83 


saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of 
the Holy Ghost.” 

Then in verse 6 Christ lays down the fundamental prin- 
ciple that “like produces like.” Flesh produces flesh and 
Spirit begets spirit. Yet is it the rule “each after its kind.” 
The inference is necessary that only the spiritual enter the 
Kingdom of God. ‘To the marvelling Sanhedrist Jesus 
likened the Spirit’s operation to the wind that maybe was 
‘whistling’ on that dark night. The fact and results of the 
wind are evident but the cause and methods of its working 
are invisible and perhaps mysterious. 

Jesus’ question, ‘Art thou a teacher of Israel, and under- 
standest not these things?’”’ must have come as a rebuke to 
the authoritative and scholarly Nicodemus. His ignorance 
was indicative of the spiritual plight of Israel, so bound by 
traditions, yet so dense to spiritual teaching or even the 
literal Old Testament meaning. 


Then that Teacher “who spoke as never man spake” de- 
-clared that He spake from knowledge, not from hearsay or 
theory (verse 11). Yet His witness was not received. He 
had spoken to Nicodemus of “earthly things’—the new 
birth, baptism, spiritual quickening—yet Nicodemus be- 
lieved not. .The Master’s argument was “Since I told you 
earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I 
tell you heavenly things?” Nicodemus and his type had 
been refusing to believe and act upon what Christ had taught 
as duty and practice. The implication was that if they re- 
fused to believe the “earthly things,’ they would not be- 
lieve the “heavenly.” 


Then in verse 13 Christ asserts His own authority. He 
knew of the how as well as the what. Yet Nicodemus, like 
all others, must take a step of faith. He must “trust where 
he could not trace.” He must be “born of water and the 
Spirit.” He must look up to Christ as a Saviour as well 
asa Teacher. As the bitten Israelites looked at the serpents 
so Nicodemus must look to the Son of Man (See Numbers 
21:4-9). Faith to gaze upon the brazen serpent, symbolical 
of the cause of their poisoned death-doomed condition, 
meant life for bitten Israelites; faith to look to the Son of 
Man, who one day was to bear our sins in His body on the 


84 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


tree, would mean life to all who looked. Jesus taught 
Nicodemus the simple way of faith, repentance, baptism 
and spiritual quickening. Even when Christ was on earth 
His followers received in anticipation the merits of the 
crucified Christ. Those in Moses’ day who were filled with 
poison of serpents looked upon a serpent and lived; in our 
day those filled with the poison of sin look upon “Him. . . 
who was made sin for us”; and live spiritually. This is 
God’s wonderful provision which has sprung out of His 
love (John 3:16). Anyone may believe and have eternal 
life. For this cause Christ came into the world, not to 
leave the world downcast but lifted up. He was not first 
and foremost a Judge but a Sawour (Luke 19:10). Re- 
jection of the Son of Man is to be condemned (verse 18). 
Christ’s presence in the world as the “light of the world” 
has made all mankind to be without excuse. As Nicodemus 
sought the light of Christ in the night so all should come to 
Him “‘the Light of the world,” yet not to leave unenlightened 
spiritually but guickened and bearers of the word of life. 


“Light received increaseth light, 
Light rejected bringeth night.” 


§ 29. Christ Baptizing in Judea. John 3: 22-24. 


There has been much conjecturing as to why Jesus, 
through His disciples, baptized (John 4:12). Edersheim 
says, ‘“‘When the Baptist was about to be forsaken, betrayed 
and murdered (this) was Christ’s highest testimony to him. 
Jesus adopted his Baptism, ere its waters forever ceased to 
flow, and thus He blessed and consecrated them. He took 
up the work of His forerunner, and continued it. The bap- 
tismal rite of John, administered with the sanction of Jesus, 
was the highest witness that could be born to it.”’ 

John was baptizing at the same time as Christ at a place 
of “much water.” For that “Monster of Iniquity,” as Whit- 
well Wilson describes Herod, had not yet cast John into 
prison. But John’s work was nearing a close, for Herod, 
the Idumean, descendant of Esau, was not content to have 
slaughtered babes and his own kin. He imprisoned the 
great prophet John because John rebuked him, and he would 
not be rebuked. 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 85 


Jesus was a descendant of Jacob and a first-born, yet He 
never longed for temporal power as did Jacob. In Herod, 
however, Esau wreaked vengeance for the wrong done him 
by the Supplanter Jacob. On this P. Whitwell Wilson 
writes so well that I beg to quote him: ‘‘When Jesus was 
born it seemed as if the soldiers of Edom were triumphing 
everywhere over the civilians of Israel; but . . . Jesus 
devoted Himself not to the profession of arms, but to a 
manual industry; and, against all appearances, declared that 
it is the meek who will inherit the earth. History has! justi- 
fied His wisdom. Commerce has proved more powerful 
than capture and conquest. The Jews have no army, no 
navy, no frontiers, no fortresses. But they continue as a 
nation richer today and more powerful than at any time in 
their long and checkered history, while Edom is an evil 
memory. Her rock-hewn fastnesses, once so formidable, are 
haunts for the beasts of the desert.’”?’ On Herod, Wilson 
writes: “Like his great ancestor, Esau, when he despised 
his birthright, Herod was at the point of death; and every 
man who is conscious of that dread enemy’s approach is 
also near to God. For the sake of the last shreds of his 
power, this “profane” man threw away the everlasting fame 
which would have been his if he had bowed the knee to 
One who could pardon even him. He knew that the stars 
cannot lie. He believed the Prophets. But instead of be- 
queathing his throne to Jesus, he fought blindly for the 
survival of his vested interest, and bartered his soul for a 
mess of pottage. In the annals of error, there is no more 
pitiful picture than this of a king who fought for a throne, 
only to murder his heir; built a temple, but killed the high 
priest; consummated a brilliant marriage, but slew his wife; 
massacred his subjects to strengthen his dynasty—including 
the slaughter of infants under two years old, in order to 
ease that one faded life of his which had less than two years 
torun.” In Herod we see personified the evil of a monarchy 
when the wrong man is on the throne and in power. But 
Jesus did not denounce the Herods. He suffered in their 
stead and thus displayed that “mercy” which “is enthroned 
in the heart of kings, . . . an attribute to God Himself.” 


86 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 30. J sory: Testimony to Christ at Aenon. John 3: 
25-36. 


John’s disciples, jealous of Jesus, and perturbed because 
of the evident loss of prestige on the part of their teacher, 
hurried to John with the word that “He . . . to whom thou 
hast borne witness . . . baptizeth and all men come to 
him.” John’s simple reply was, “A man can receive nothing 
except it be given him from heaven.” He implied that 
Jesus’ ministry was a gift of heaven. He reaffirmed “I am 
not the Christ.” His office he defined as “The friend of 
the bridegroom.” He was the ‘Best Man” eager to do the 
bidding of the groom. He cared for nothing so much as 
the heavenly Bridegroom’s success and happiness. When 
the voice of the Bridegroom sounded joyful the “friend” 
was happy (verse 29). When John saw that Jesus did 
well his joy was “fulfilled.” He simply counted or reckoned 
that “He must increase but I must decrease.” 

John had received a revelation that Jesus was the Son of 
God. He knew he was Christ’s forerunner and was ready 
to have his sun sink as that of Christ rose. No coterie of 
followers could tempt him to jealousy or arouse in him an 
unwarranted ambition. His vision gave him poise. He 
was no “reed shaken with the wind but a prophet and more 
than a prophet.” 

John the Baptist knew that Christ was ‘“‘above all’? where- 
as his own followers were “of the earth” and spoke of the 
earth. ‘Theirs was earthly wisdom. Christ’s witness had ° 
been rejected by men though He spake “words of God.” 
Yet John saw in Christ Him who had the Spirit not by 
measure; and Him by whom all, who obey, have eternal 
life; as well as Him whose rejection will be accompanied 


by God’s wrath (John 3: 34-36). 


§ 31. The Departure From Judea. Mat. 4:12; 
Mark 1:14; John 4: 1-3. 


In John’s account of Jesus leaving Judea the Pharisees 
are cited as the reason for His going. Probably Jesus felt 
that the Pharisees would incite John’s disciples to oppose 
Him, And Jesus, of course, desired no misunderstanding 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 87 


with John’s followers. Then the Master may have left 
Judea simply to avoid a useless altercation with the Phari- 
saical party. Clear it is at least that the Pharisees were in- 
volved in His starting for Galilee. Thus early in His min- 
istry does Jesus recognize the antagonism of this religious 
group that opposed Him at every turn and, by some, are 
thought to have spurred Herod on to imprison the Baptist. 


§ 32. Discourse With the Woman of Samaria. 
John 4: 4-26. 


The shorter route from Judea to Galilee lay through 
Samaria and Josephus says that the Galileans ordinarily 
used this one to go to the capital. So we understand “He 
must needs pass through Samaria.” Edersheim contends 
that Judaeans usually made a detour through Perea to avoid 

-hostile and impure Samaria. Possibly Jesus desired to 
avoid Perea, the seat of Herod’s government. The Samari- 
tans seem to have been much like the Judaeans. Likely 
when the deportation occurred under Sargon many Israel- 
itish inhabitants were left behind. Fugitives from Assyria 
fled to Samaria. Apostates from the Jerusalem of Ezra and 
Nehemiah went to Samaria. Ezra and Nehemiah demanded 
a strict separation from Samaria because the latter contained 
elements that had corrupted Judah before the deportation to 
Babylon. 

The Samaritans had a rival temple on Mount Gerizim and 
Manasseh, forced to leave Jerusalem because of his mar- 
riage with the daughter of Sanballat, became High Priest. 
The Samaritans had their own version of the Pentateuch 
and in Deut. 27:4 substituted Mount Gerizim for Mount 
Ebal. So a great antipathy existed between Jews and 

Samaritans. The latter “tried to desecrate the temple on 
the eve of the Passover; and they waylaid and killed pil- 
grims on their road to Jerusalem.” The Jews held the 
Samaritans with contempt and would not recognize them 
of the same religion and race. The fact that they were so 
much like the Jews made the feeling more acute. In the 
“Testament of the ‘'welve Patriarchs” (2d Century), 
“Sichem” is the City of Fools. But at Christ’s time all 
Samaritan food was declared lawful, hence Jesus’ disciples 


88 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


brought “bread.” Evidently among these Samaritans “Jesus 
would find a soil better prepared for the Divine Seed, or, 
at least, less encumbered by the thistles and tares of tradi- 
tionalism and Pharisaic bigotry.” “The parcel of ground 
that Jacob gave to his son Joseph” is referred to in Gen. 
48:22. Here Joseph was buried (Joshua 24:32). “Jesus 
being wearied”’ and sitting “‘thus;” i. e., wearily on the well, 
reminds us of His humanity. He had travelled during the 
day. It was now 6 p. m., for John uses the Roman reckon- 
ing in stating time. Water drawing was done in the evening. 


Jesus, seeing the Samaritan woman, sought her good will 
by asking her a favor, as Abbott says. ‘Then the woman 
recognizing either by His dress, language or physiognomy 
that He was a Jew, wondered at His request, since the Jews 
and Samaritans were not sociable. Jesus took occasion to 
speak to her of the “living water” that He had to offer to 
anyone asking. He was thus using a term familiar to those 
who knew the Bible (Gen. 26:19; Jer. 2:13), and putting 
into it a new and spiritual meaning. But the woman mis- 
understood His allusion and reminded Him of His inability 
to draw without a “leathern bucket and a line” about 90 
feet long. To His apparently boastful suggestion of pro- 
viding the water she asks Him if He were greater than 
Jacob from whom the Samaritans probably descended 
through Joseph and then Ephraim and Manasseh. Finally 
the surprised woman innocently asked for the “living water” 
to which He had referred. 


Then Jesus asked her to “Go call” her “husband,” yet to 
the woman’s answer “I have no husband,” Jesus replied, 
“Thou saidst well, I have no husband: for thou hast had 
five husbands and he whom thou hast now is not thy hus- 
band: this hast thou said truly.” The question arises as to 
how Jesus could have asked her to call her “husband” when 
He knew as He afterwards said that she had no “husband” 
at that time. ‘There are different satisfactory answers to 
this question. First the word used here is aner, meaning 
man. Now if we substitute man in the account for husband 
the meaning is clear. Man has two slightly different mean- 
ings which to us husband has not. Then Christ may have 
been “drawing her out” for the moment. Or, and what 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 89 


seems to the writer the likeliest explanation, Christ called on 
His divine stock of knowledge only upon need. When He 
first asked her to call upon her husband He was talking only 
as aman. ‘Then when the situation demanded it, He drew 
on omniscience and saw her complete history before Him 
as clear as a printed page. 

She was a “much married”? woman and possibly living an 
illegal life, though Edersheim is inclined to give her the 
benefit of the doubt and. to conclude that she may have been 
conforming to the law of the land. Whatever the facts 
were she knew that Jesus saw her whole life story as an 
open book and then she said, “Sir, I perceive that thou art 
a prophet.” 

Her directing the subject to religious externalism, such 
as the proper place of worship, is interesting and might 
easily betray her conviction of sin. Her ancestors had wor- 
shipped on Mount Gerizim for 400 years. And the Jews 
had thought of Jerusalem as their center for centuries 
(1 Kings 8:48; 9:3). But Jesus, eager to get her to face 
spiritual verities, suggested the fact that they were on the 
eve of a time when place of worship would not matter. 
Then He affirmed that “salvation is from the Jews.” He 
has convinced her of His being a Prophet and now He 
pushes the matter further. He boldly affirms that even the 
Samaritans must look to the Jews for their Saviour regard- 
less of previous antagonisms. Then He directs her to a 
consideration of “true” (or “ideal”—Westcott) worship- 
pers, who are characterized by worshipping in “spirit and 
truth.” ‘These worship from the heart with a genuineness 
which formality has never known. 

This Samaritan woman by her statement, “I know that 
Messiah cometh [which is called the Christ]” (verse 25) 
disclosed the fact that the Samaritans also looked for the 
Messiah. Then strange as it may seem to us Jesus directly 
disclosed to her the fact that He was that very Messiah. 
His ways are past finding out. He knows what is in man. 
No word of His was wasted. 


90 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 33. The Gospel in Sychar. John 4: 27-42. 


The disciples, coming and finding their Master talking 
with the woman, marvelled. ‘Their wonder was not that He 
talked with a Samaritan woman, or that particular Samar- 
itan woman, but that He conversed with any woman in 
public. The Rabbis said that a man should not talk with 
even his own wife in public. 


Yet not one disciple asked Jesus why He spoke with the 
woman. Evidently they felt something restraining them in 
the very looks of Jesus. 

Then the woman went into the city leaving her water pots. 
Various reasons are suggested for this leaving of her pots. 
(1) It indicated she would return. (2) That Christ might 
use them.—Lightfoot. (3) That she might make the more 
speed. (4) Because her interview with Christ had so en- 
gaged her that she forgot them. Upon her arrival she 
announced with eagerness, ‘“‘Come see a man, which told me 
all things that I did: can this be the Christ?’ Her state- 
ment indicates that her excitement leads her to exaggerate 
with reference to the “all things that I did,” yet surely she 
realized that her life to Christ was an open book. Her 
question is of such a form as to demand a negative answer 
but as Cook says, “Hope bursts through it.” Doubtless she 
felt as do we when we sing “‘it’s almost too good to be true.” 
Verse 30 gives us a very vivid picture of a considerable 
crowd of nondescript Samaritans leaving the city at once 
and travelling along the highway towards the well to see 
this most unusual character so eagerly announced by the 
woman. One thing is certain about this woman. Folks 
took her at her word. Her witness to Christ started a pro- 
cession of those who trusted her veracity towards the Mes- 
siah. Would that our service for our Saviour would be so 
productive of results. 

Verse 31 changes the scene. ‘The disciples, solicitous for 
Jesus’ physical welfare, entreated Him to eat. But He had 
meat to eat of which they knew nothing. ‘The disciples 
could not understand Him, not knowing the source of His 
supply (verse 33). But said He, ‘“My meat is to do the 
will of him that sent me, and to accomplish his work.” He 


THE EARLY JUDEAN MINISTRY 91 


was lost in His work and His mind was brightened and His 
body refreshed. Have we not felt this in a measure in our 
own experiences? Have you not been refreshed while at 
worship or while about the Father’s business? ‘Love 
lightens labor.” A mother, weak and worn, yet cares for 
her child that is dangerously ill. Even sleep seems unneces- 
sary. When she does sleep it is as we read in the Song of 
Solomon 5:2, “I sleep, but my heart waketh.” So as the 
Master’s enthusiasm for souls was kindled He became care- 
less of provision for His body. But His disciples lacked 
that keenness of spiritual perception which He had in per- 
fection. Jesus was bent on “doing” His Father’s will until 
He had accomplished His work (verse 34). Did He not 
look forward to that moment when He would utter “It is 
finished”? But as yet He saw “fields . . . white unto 
harvest.” ‘The “golden grain” was soon to whiten and then 
fall to the ground. Reapers were needed. ; 
Then came the Samaritans full of faith through the 
testimony of the woman. They opened to Him their homes 
as well as their hearts. ‘And he abode there two days.” 
They accepted Him as the “Saviour of the world.” Un- 
hampered by the traditions and prejudices of Judea, these 
despised Samaritans believed in Jesus and gave Him their 
hospitality. 


re 
Hell yt 


aia 
a ae 


7 Hit 
ML ek ive 

Dy, fio Pa 
hat aa 


Als 


Aj! 


ho 












‘atic PART IV | wy 
First Period of the Galilean Ministry 


Wes 
ya 
. 
Une 


ae 
"a 
a 
me beg ' at 
an 
t ‘a ts 
Me Sa aN 





meAp 
Mer 


as rite 


ri i ay t ‘ 
arb X i . 
y 
uy 
= 
Dd 
ee 
‘ 4, 
NE. 2¥5 A, 
a _ 


; se : 
ei 
may) 


» 
2 
# 








FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 


From THE RETURN To GALILEE UNTIL THE CHOOSING OF 
THE ‘TWELVE 


§ 34. The Beginning of Christ’s Galilean Ministry. 
Mat. 4:12 (13-16), 17; Mark 1:14, 15; 
Luke 4:14, 15; John 4: 43-45. 


Jesus’ statement of John 4: 44 is one that requires some 
thought since He was just entering “His own country.” 
What did He mean by His own country? (1) It has been 
contended that Judea was really His own country but was 
less hospitable than Galilee, so He went to the latter. With 
this I disagree. (2) Meyer points out that Galilee was His 
“country” and that Jesus had gone to Judea and gotten a 
reputation and had returned to His own country afterwards. 
And now He is known as a prophet. But this does not 
seem right. (3) Trench thinks that Nazareth was “His 
own country” and so He went to other Galilean cities. With 
this lagree. Luke 4:24 implies the same. In Galilee Jesus 
met those that had been at Jerusalem at the Passover Feast 
and so were prepared to “receive Him having seen all things 
that He did in Jerusalem at the feast.” 


§ 35. The Nobleman’s Son. John 4: 46-54. 


The miracle of turning the water into wine was still fresh 
in the minds of the residents of Cana of Galilee. Evidently 
the report of it had travelled to Capernaum 20 or 25 miles 
distant for “there was a certain nobleman, whose son was 
sick at Capernaum,” and “When he heard that Jesus was 
come out of Judea into Galilee, he went unto him, and 
besought him that he would come down and heal his son.” 
Jesus used the occasion of this request to call for a simple 
faith not based on “signs and wonders.” His saying 
“Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe,” was 
the cry of His own soul against the shallow, elementary 
faith of those about Him. They needed the “sign,” mir- 

95 


96 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


acle, that suggested a supernatural power, that pointed as 
a “Sign Board” Godward. ‘They needed the “wonder” to 
arrest their attention, to make them wonder as they “‘kept”’ in 
mind what they saw. For “wonder” comes from the verb 
tereo, keep, guard. So Jesus spoke the word “Go thy way; 
thy son liveth.” ‘The man believed the word that Jesus 
spake unto him and he went his way.” He acted on his faith 
without the “sign.” He had come for Jesus to go to his 
house in person, but was content to go upon Jesus’ word. 
His servant’s report confirmed his faith in Christ’s word. 
He had learned that distance or space mattered not to Jesus. 
His whole house believed with him. Some one must take 
the initiative. Others follow. 


§ 36. First Rejection at Nazareth. Mat. 13: 54-58; 
Mark 6: 1-6a; Luke 4: 16-30. 


The synagogue was the result of the captivity. When 
Israel was in Babylon away from the temple there was felt 
the need of a place of meeting, hence the synagogue. In 
this we see how God does make everything to work out for 
good in His great omniscience and omnipotence. 

In studying of the Preparation of the World for Christi- 
anity we learn that the Jews provided “divine truth and 
faith.” The synagogue, also, was a contribution towards 
this preparation. Therein, not only Christ, but His dis- 
ciples, proclaimed the Gospel. 

Attendance upon the synagogue was expected from the 
Jews. Absence meant personal guilt. Effectual prayer 
could be offered in the synagogue only. The synagogue was 
“consecrated to God” and could not be used for any other 
purpose than worship, yet it might be transformed into an 
academy. ‘Ministers’ of the synagogue were to be irre; 
proachable. Then there were the “rulers” of the synagogue 
and the chief ruler who was responsible for the services. 
He it was who would ask Jesus to be the “delegate of the 
congregation” on such an occasion as this. An order of 
service was followed in the same manner as we have an 
order of service in our churches. It was as follows: Prayer, 
Reciting of Creed, Benedictions, Reading of law, Benedic- 
tions again, Reading of Prophets. When the Prophets were 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 97 


read an Interpreter gave the ‘‘substance.” This was called 
“targuming”’ (Neh. 8:8). This interpreting was necessary 
because of the language of the people not being in Hebrew. 
Translation into the vulgar was necessary. We can under- 
stand on this principle why certain quotations taken from 
the Old Testament to the New are not as the Old “word for 
word.” They are usually from the Septuagint, a paraphrase. 


The sermon was an important part of the Synagogue 
service. The preacher—sometimes a noted visiting Rabbi— 
was supposed to have made a moral and a mental prepara- 
tion. Just as in our day we demand that a preacher shall 
practise so in the first century they had a saying “You 
preach beautifully but you do not practise beautifully.” He 
who had read the law might preach if he were capable. 
He could employ an interpreter, an Amora or speaker, to 
explain his sermon to the people if necessary. This would be 
when a Rabbi would whisper to the Amora and he would 
give it out in Aramzan or Latin as the people required. 


There were certain noted popular preachers who were 
not real “students.’”’ What they gave out was compared to 
“toys, tinsels and trifles” as contrasted with the “jewels” 
of the Rabbis. Indeed they remind me of the Greek Sophists, 
who were, first and last, Rhetoricians rather than logicians. 
Against these Socrates worked when he stood for stand- 
ards. ‘They were time servers and people pleasers. In those 
days as in ours there were certain popular demands upon a 
“preacher.” He should have (a) a good figure, (b) a 
pleasant expression, (c) a melodious voice, “words like a 
bride’s to a groom,” (d) fluency, “speech sweet as honey,” 
(e) diction richly adorned, even as a bride knows how to 
adjust her ornaments on the wedding day, (f) not easily 
disconcerted, (g) conciliatory, (h) not personal, for had not 
Moses failed to lead Israel over Jordan after he rebuked 
them, and was not Elijah succeeded by Elisha after Carmel’s 
scene? Now these preachers seemed to care more for man- 
ner than matter. In order to arouse a sleepy audience 
one preacher was reported to have asked why Esther was 
queen over 127 Persian Provinces. ‘The answer was, 
Because she was a descendant of Sarah who was 127 years 
old. Again, what woman bore 600,000 men at a single 

7 


98 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


birth? Answer, Jochebed, mother of Moses, because 
Moses was worth 600,000 Israelites. A preacher was sup- 
posed to know his Bible well, prepare to preach—“hear him- 
self—before the people heard him.” He must be “attrac- 
tive;’’ i. e., he must hold his audience from walking out while 
he preached. 

Now when we read of all these requirements and yet note 
that “all bare him witness, and wondered at the words of 
grace which proceeded out of his mouth’ (Luke 4:22) we 
can understand more fully the statement ‘““Never man spake 
like this man.” He applied Isaiah 61:1, 2a to Himself 
(Luke 4:21). How pretentious His claim must have 
sounded to His prejudiced neighbors! And although “words 
of grace . . . proceeded out of his mouth,” they asked “Is 
not this Joseph’s son?” 

Jesus preceived their questionings. He read their 
thoughts. He knew that the Nazarenes expected Him to per- 
form some miracle in His “own country.” But instead He 
reminded them how Elijah passed by many famine stricken 
widows of Israel, yet provided food for the widow of Zare- 
phath; how Elisha did not cleanse the lepers of Israel, yet he 
did instruct Naaman the Syrian how to be healed of his 
leprosy. As Israel’s prophets had not applied “Physician, 
heal thyself,” even so the prophet in their midst was passing 
by “His own” for others. This excited their jealousies and 
incited them to anger. ‘They rose right up in the synagogue 
and “cast him forth out of the city.” Their intention evi- 
dently was to kill Him (verse 29), but He eluded them. 

Edersheim thinks that His visit to Nazareth “was in many 
respects decisive.” Christ’s History is here represented in 
“epitome.” ‘He came unto his own and his own received 
him not.’ But Christ’s aim was to please the Father and 
so He would not look on this as an “ordeal.” 


§ 37. Removal to Capernaum. Mat. 4: 13-16; Luke 4: 
3la. 


Christ, cast out of His own town, went to Capernaum, 
which was to be His future home, or rather the center from 
which He went out to the surrounding villages and to which 
He returned. Like Abraham of oid, the Master “looked for 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 99 


a city whose builder and maker is God.’ So He was 
not concerned about permanent abodes on earth. He was a 
“Sojourner” on earth and in this respect, as in so many 
others, is the example of the saints, “pilgrims and strangers’ 
here whose “citizenship is in heaven.”’ Says Papini, “In no 
city did He make a long stay. Jesus was a wanderer, such 
aman as is called a vagabond by the . . . sedentary citizen 
rooted to his threshold. His life is an eternal journey... 
He was born ona journey. Still a baby at the breast He was 
carried along the sun-parched road to Egypt; from Egypt 
He came back to the waters and greenness of Galilee. From 
Nazareth He often went to Jerusalem to the Passover. The 
voice of John called Him to the Jordan; an inner voice 
called Him to the desert; and after the forty days of hunger 
and temptation, He began His restless vagabond life from 
city to city, from village to village, from mountain to moun- 
tain across Palestine . 

“He is the traveler without rest, the wanderer with no 
home, the wayfarer for love’s sake, the voluntary exile in 
His own country. .. . His bed is the furrow in a field, 
the bench of a boat, the shadow of an olive tree. Some- 
times He sleeps in the houses of those who love Him, but 
only for short periods . . . His journeys often began and 
ended at Capernaum. Matthew called it ‘his city.’ At 
Capernaum He had access to the synagogue built by the good 
centurion (Luke 7:5). There was Jairus, a ruler of the 
synagogue (Mark 5:22). Then His earliest disciples had 
their homes near there.” 

So Christ “passed the summer” in a “ministry of quiet 
‘power’ chiefly alone and unattended by His disciples.” 
There has been a tradition in the synagogue that the pre- 
diction of Isaiah 9:2 “referred to the new light, with which 
God would enlighten the eyes of those who had penetrated 
into the mysteries of Rabbinic Lore, enabling them to per- 
ceive concerning ‘loosing and binding’ concerning what was 
clean and what was unclean.’”’ Others said it referred to a 
promise to returned exiles. But Matthew applied it to 
Christ’s Galilean ministry. He saw in Him who is the 
“True light that lighteth every man that cometh into the 
world” the Illuminator of all Galilee in the regions of Zebu- 
lun and Naphtali. 


100 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 38. The Call of the Four. Mat. 14:18-22; Mark 
1: 16-20; Luke 5: 1-11. 


In John 1: 35-51, Sections 23 and 24, we have the record 
of the call to “discipleship,” but here we have the call “to 
fellowship and Apostolate.” Luke records some details, 
whereas Matthew and Mark give a condensed account. They 
supplement each other. The scene is along the northern 
shore of the Sea of Galilee or Lake of Gennesaret. It is 
early in the morning, yet a “multitude” is pressing upon 
Jesus to hear Him speak the “word of God” as He stands 
by the sea. Capernaum, on the caravan route, had become 
a commercial center. ‘‘Artisans, bargainers, brokers and 
shopkeepers had come there to stay.” A motley crowd sur- 
rounded the Great Teacher, so He got permission to enter 
Simon’s boat, from which He taught. (Luke 5:3). Then, 
when He was done with His teaching, He bade Peter “Put 
out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught.” 
“And Simon answered and said Master, we toiled all night 
and took nothing.” Likely the night had been a stormy one. 
And what Simon implies is that since we caught nothing 
during the night it would be futile to cast net during the day. 
He had concluded that they were not in “luck” that time. 
But when Jesus bade him because of his faith in the Master 
he said “but at thy word I will let down the nets.” Simon 
took a step of faith based on Jesus’ word. He “experi- 
mented and gained an experience” (Tyson in “Church on the 
Dune’) as some present day writers would put it. He obeyed 
because he believed. Their “catch” was so embarrassingly 
large that they were compelled to call for help to relieve 
breaking nets (Luke 5:6) and then their “boats 
. . . began to sink” (Luke 5:7). Then Peter “fell down at 
Jesus’ feet (knees), saying, Depart from me; for I am 
a sinful man, O Lord.’ But Jesus had no intentions of 
departing from Peter. He assured Him that from that 
time on he would “catch men.” Peter was amazed at 
Christ’s power and success. He knew he had no such power 
or skill and so felt ill at ease in the presence of this Expert 
Fisher, but Jesus was simply teaching him that as he had 
caught fish by simply obeying Christ so later he would catch 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 101 


men by the same obedience. Pentecost fulfilled the pre- 
diction. 

So Peter, Andrew, James and John were called to per- 
manent discipleship and preparation for their future work. 
The “Follow me” of Christ would be understood for “it 
was not only the practice, but regarded as one of the most 
sacred duties, for a Master to gather around him a circle 
of disciples.” This call of the early disciples was marked 
or characterized by its being (1) a call to fellowship. Christ 
had broken with and been persecuted by the Jewish author- 
ities. Whatever fellowship He enjoyed was with His dis- 
ciples. (2) It was a call from former occupations and 
earthly ties. (3) It was a call to Discipleship not simply 
to “learn more of doctrine” but to pursue a type of work 
quite unlike their former occupation, yet one for which that 
was emblematic. They were to “catch men.” Practice 
was to accompany precept. They were to live out the 
lessons as they learned them. ‘Their Teacher emphasized 
the “Function” rather than the ‘‘Content” theory of knowl- 
edge. LA a 

“So “Four poor fishermen, four plain men of the lake, 
men who did not know how to read, nor indeed how to 
speak correctly, four humble men whom no one else would 
have been able to distinguish from others, were called by 
Jesus to found with Him a kingdom which was to occupy 
all the earth.”—Papini. 


One author suggests that the fisherman knows how to wait, 
that he is patient and after letting down his nets all the rest 
is left with God. He has “good days” and “bad days.” 
“He washes his hands in water and his spirit in solitude.” 
So Jesus took these men and made leaders out of them. 
Given a great man and others grow up around him. David 
had his warriors; Arthur gathered together his knights, 
“Charlemagne his paladins, Napoleon his marshalls” and 
Jesus His Apostles. 

And Jesus Christ, the God-Man, is still saying “Follow 
me.” A small group from among the “multitude” leave all 
and follow Him. ‘Those sit at His feet. They are “with 
Christ in the school of Prayer.”’ They fulfill the injunction 
“Abide with me.” Having learned of Him He bids them 


102 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“Go ye” and they go forth as heralds of the Truth: they 
become Crusaders of the Cross, for each age needs declara- 
tions of the Gospel message. The Apostles had as their 
worthy successors the Apologists and the Apostolic Fathers. 
And since their day there has been a catena (chain) of wit- 
nesses, souls as truly devoted to Christ as the sons of Jonas 
and Zebedee, “gifts of God.” So the fire of truth has been 
descried in the distance as one saint and then another 
would kindle it on the mountain-top of his own age and 
country. Thus we stand on our peak of revealed truth and 
Gospel blessing and gaze afar. 

We see the lights of Simpson, Edwards, Finney, Wesley, 
Whitefield, Knox, Luther, Huss and Wycliffe, and other 
lights shining but dimly because of distance. But each 
one is on its mountain top of blessing and was lit by hands 
of faith with the spark of truth or with coals carried from 
the mountain just beyond. 


§ 39. A Day of Miracles in Capernaum. Mat. 8: 14- 
17; Mark 1: 21-34; Luke 4: 31-41. 


On this Sabbath day Capernaum was amazed. All who 
attended the synagogue were astonished at the most ex- 
traordinary Rabbi. Jesus was teaching that day. Probably 
as before at Nazareth He commented on the appointed 
selection from the Prophets. And how different was the 
lesson in His hands than in the hands of the scribes. His 
was a note of authority. Something in His general char- 
acter enabled Him to put a meaning into the words that 
often seemed dry and obscure. Not that all who listened 
and were enrapt began to make the glorious ideal a reality 
in their lives. But there was a recognition of the true, the 
grand, the high. ‘There is that in man, evidence of his 
origin and destiny, which always and involuntarily responds 
to the presentation of the higher.” 

There was in that representative synagogue audience 
that day one who recognized the Teacher. The fact that 
the demonized man was present and apparently calm up to 
this point argues that the “unclean spirit’ did not possess 
him constantly. Here we see a case of a man at worship. 
All about are wondering at the authoritative utterances of 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 103 


the Great Teacher, but this one suddenly cries out “What 
have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou 
come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art the Holy 
One of God.’ Imagine the excitement of that company. 
Here is one who recognizes in Jesus of Nazareth “the Holy 
one of God.” But he looked not upon Jesus as a Saviour, 
but a destroyer. So ever it is with demons. Christ they 
recognize, yet not as we, for we know of Him as the One 
“Who will save his people from their sins.” We note here 
that . . . demons know Christ. His presence or His 
name provokes their displeasure. Yet they are not wise 
enough to conceal their knowledge of and regard for Him, 
nor yet their enmity. But Jesus would not be heralded by 
such a one; so He rebuked the unclean spirit and bade it 
leave the person. Whereupon it threw him into a paroxysm 
and using that voice for the last time, uttered a cry and 
“came out of him.” Then those that had been astonished 
at His words of authority were now amazed at His work 
of power. ‘The question was “What is this, a new teach- 
ing?” His power was beyond their understanding. “Even 
unclean spirits . . . obey Him.’ So when the meeting was 
concluded the “report” of this unusual synagogue happen- 
ing and its Actor spread over Galilee like wild fire. 

It is evident that “the consciousness was not that of the 
demonized but of the demonizer, just as in certain mesmeric 
states the consciousness of the mesmerized is really that of 
the mesmerizer,” and that the influence was sudden because 
of coming into contact with Christ’s person. 


The Jews attempted to remove demons. Edersheim lists 
the means as follows (1) Magical means for prevention 
(avoidance of certain places, times, numbers, or circum- 
stances; amulets, etc.). (2) Direct exorcism, (by certain 
outward means or incantations). But Jesus spake the word 
of power and the demons obeyed. ‘This power He trans- 
ferred to His disciples. 

Since “Jesus Christ came to destroy the works of the 
devil” as these works are evident in humanity, and as Christ 
took a human form (Incarnation) to do this, it is clear 
that Satan and his cohorts are eager, by indwelling men and 
women, to destroy them and thus frustrate Christ’s effort to 


104 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


heal and save. But men can and do resist Satan’s intrusions. 
So even the “possessed” man is morally responsible because 
there apparently are periods when he could “‘resist the devil.” 
Wonderful it is that these demons in the presence of Jesus 
“own defeat before the conflict.” 

When the Master with His disciples had left the 
synagogue they went to Peter’s home. But they were not 
received to the accustomed feast for Peter’s wife’s mother 
' had suddenly taken a “burning fever.” Such a fever is 
common in that district today and for it the Talmud pre- 
scribes a magical remedy. It is as follows: ‘Tie a knife 
wholly of iron by a braid of hair to a thorn bush and repeat 
on successive days Ex. 3: 2-3, then verse 4, and finally verse 
5, after which the bush is cut down as a whole and a certain 
magical formula is pronounced.” 


But how different was the healing of Jesus! ‘“They tell 
him of her’ and “besought him for her.” The Master 
Physician came to the woman and stooping over her (Luke 
4:29) He took her by the hand (Mat. 8:15; Mark 1:31) 
and ‘“‘rebuked the fever” (Luke 4: 39) and it left her. Then 
she arose and ministered unto him. Here is “the first 
Diaconate.” She who had been healed was the Deaconess. 
What a meal that must have been, planned by a brain just 
relieved from the pressure of a raging fever, and prepared 
by a hand cooled by the Master’s touch. How glad is the 
service of those that live because He lives. 


As the Sabbath drew to a close and the sun set, the star of 
hope appeared in Capernaum, for the villagers realized that 
in their midst was the One who had power over all disease. 
They learn that He is in Peter’s home, so to that house 
they go’with all their sick. “From all parts they bring 
them: mothers, wives, widows, fathers, children, husbands 
—their loved ones, the treasures they had almost lost. . ..” 
They wait expectantly at Peter’s home. Jesus comes forth 
and each diseased one feels the tender yet telling touch of 
those hands that were one day to be pierced with unrelent- 
ing nails. All are healed. Demons are cast out and bidden 
not to speak because “they knew that he was the Christ.” 
Matthew tells us that this fulfilled the prophecy “Himself 
took our infirmities and bare our diseases.” Now there are 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY = 105 


those that take great pains to prove that this passage does not 
teach that the atonement of Christ includes provision for 
bodily healing. Some say that He “bare our diseases” 
(1. e., the diseases of those about Him on earth) sympathetic- 
ally. Others say the Greek word used by Matthew and 
translated “bare’’ (bastazo) means that as a “burden laid 
upon him” He bare our diseases. But I should ask pardon 
for stating what seems a very weak negative case, The fact 
is that both Lidell and Scott and also Thayer give “take 
away’ for bastazo, as well as to bear up as one does a 
burden. This is clear when we realize how a burden is borne 
along and away. ‘Thayer says on “bare diseases” to take 
away or remove by curing them. Edersheim writes “T can 
scarcely find words strong enough to express my dissent 
from those who could limit Isa. 53:4, either on the one 
hand to spiritual or on the other hand to physical ‘sickness.’ 
The promise is one of future deliverance from both, of a 
Restorer from all the woe which sin had brought. In the 
same way the expression ‘taking upon himself’ and ‘bearing’ 
refers to the Christ as our Deliverer because our Sub- 
stitute. Because He took upon Himself our infirmities, 
therefore He bore our sicknesses.” That the view here given. 
is that of the New Testament appears from a comparison of 
the application of the passage in St. Mat. 8:17 with that 
in St. John 1:29 and 1 Pet. 2:24. The words as given by 
St. Matthew are most truly a New Testament ‘Targum’ 
(translation) of the Hebrew original. The LXX has it 
“This man carries our sins and is pained for us.” We note 
here that Edersheim thinks of Mat. 8:17; John 1:29; and 
1 Peter 2: 24 as parallel passages. In Matthew we have one 
word for the take away, in John another and in Peter yet 
another, but all can be translated “take away,” an expression 
which has shades of meaning displayed by various Greek 
verbs. Such a word is “bare,” past tense of bear. Matthew 
shows that Christ was relieving the sick ones of their bur- 
densome diseases. John cites John the Baptist referring to 
Christ as a Lamb, used as a substitutionary offering instead 
of the sinner or sinful world. Peter shows the Suffering 
Saviour ‘‘carrying up to the tree’ (Margin R.V.) our sins. 
Peter also adds “By whose bruise ye were healed.” 


106 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


In discussing Christ “groaning in spirit” at the grave of 
Lazarus, Edersheim (vol. 2, p. 323) says ‘“The unfathomed 
depth of the Theanthropic fellow-suffering which was both 
vicarious and redemptive.” 

Were not Christ’s beneficent works done in anticipation 
of the Cross? Could He have forgiven freely without 
Calvary in view? Sickness is a result of sin. If He atoned 
for sin, surely He atoned for the effects of sin, the cause of 
sickness. So the question of healing being in the atone- 
ment does not rest upon the meaning of bastazo, although 
bastazgo in no way embarrasses a believer in the theory of 
healing being in the atonement provided he reads his own 
Greek and not the strained translation of an objector. 


§ 40. First Preaching Tour in Galilee. (Mat. 4:23). 
Luke 4: 42-44. Mat. 8: (1) 2-4. Mark 1: 35- 
45. Luke 5: 12-16. 


The morning after the ‘““Day of miracles in Capernaum” 
the Master rose early (likely between 3 and 6 a.m.) and 
sought solitude for prayer. Since He who was divine as 
well as human felt the need of prayer in the midst of busy 
days should not we, conscious of human frailty through and. 
through, find that buoyancy and victory that is realized 
through prayer? But Jesus had chosen disciples and they 
followed Him. We would hardly venture that they annoyed 
Him, yet they did not enjoy His viewpoint and often mis- 
understood Him. What concerned the disciples was that 
Jesus was in demand. ‘They believed that He should 
embrace the opportunity that the Capernaum crowds offered 
Him, and tried to impress the Master with this fact as 
“all are seeking thee” (Mark 1:37) indicates. But Jesus 
did not share their enthusiasm for a “permanent” 
Capernaum ministry. He was eager to go “elsewhere into 
the next towns.” He had “come forth” to go from town to 
town (verse 28). 

Evidently the multitudes followed Jesus because He had 
performed miracles. Why did He not go back among them 
and receive their plaudits? How extraordinary for a popu- 
lar hero, a public benefactor, to withdraw as He was doing! 

But Christ never seemed to “‘take to” performing miracles. 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 107 


He did “wonders” yet He kept saying “Except ye see signs 
and wonders, ye will not believe;” “an evil and adulterous 
generation seeketh a sign;’” “blessed are they that have not 
seen, and yet have believed.” Mark 7: 34 records that Christ 
“sighed” (stenadzo) when he unstopped deaf ears. Luke 1; 
17-20 tells us that Christ desired His Apostles to “look for 
higher and better things than power over all diseases or 
even over evil spirits.” Having one’s name written down in 
“the Book” is a better ground for rejoicing than being able 
to perform the miracles which surely evince supernatural 
power. On this point we today need to scrutinize ourselves. 
Are we going in for the spectacular? Do we rejoice more 
over healings than over salvation of souls? Do we give 
greater honor to a brother successful in praying the prayer 
of faith for the sick than we do to one who leads souls to 
Christ or edifies them? Is it not true today that “All are 
seeking” the miracle man, the wonder worker? Is it not in 
many cases a curiosity that jams our places of meeting 
instead of a reverence for God and His Christ? But Jesus 
withdrew from the showy. He could not be spoilt by 
praise. Some of His servants have His spirit in this respect. 
The writer only a few months ago talked privately with a 
servant of God greatly used who is really humble. The 
basis of his extraordinary humility is the fact that he really 
gives God credit for what is being done through his ministry. 
But how pathetic are the cases of men who are blessed with 
gifts yet who lack the grace of humility. They are unap- 
proachable; they court flattery; they are to be prayed for 
and pitied for “Pride goeth before destruction and a 
haughty spirit before a fall.” 

But Jesus did perform miracles and many of them. Eder- 
sheim gives two reasons for His so doing. First there was 
an “inward necessity that the God-man when brought into 
contact with disease and misery . . . would remove it by 
His presence, by His touch, by His word.” There was also 
“an outward necessity because no other mode of teaching 
equally convincing would have reached those accustomed to 
Rabbinic disputations, and who must have looked for such 
a manifestation from one who claimed such authority.” 
He could not refuse to help the helpless when He had the 


108 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


resources to do so, any more than a man could neglect a suf- 
fering child. Common “milk of human kindness” would 
prompt him to relieve suffering, yet He never put out His 
“shingle” as a doer of miracles nor did He advise them to 
“bring the sick.” He was longing for a spiritual response. 
He found people too prone to build on the material. He 
deplored it, yet He did what He could for them. ‘Then 
certainly He knew that the religious leaders would be chal- 
lenged by His works since they had no heart nor head for 
His words. He was beyond them. This they would not 
grant so He was compelled to choose publicans and fisher- 
men that He might have some disciples. But His “signs,” 
“wonders” and “powers” arrested the scribes and Pharisees 
as well as the common people. He gave them pause. They 
had to reckon with Him so they said He did what He did by 
Beelzebub. “Dyed-in-the-wool,” dogmatic theology has 
always cried “False Prophet,” “Anti-Christ” and “Servant of 
Satan” at those that differed with it. It is easy to anathe- 
matize one that you cannot classify, but let us beware lest 
our anathemas become boomerangs. 

So Christ “went into their synagogues throughout all 
Galilee preaching and casting out devils.” (Mark 1:39.) 
Christ subordinated everything else to going about utilizing 
the Jewish synagogue as an avenue for getting His teach- 
ing to the hearts of the people. 


Here we meet the incident of the willingness of Christ to 
heal the leper, whom He did cleanse of his leprosy. (See 
Mat. 8:2-4; Mark 1: 40-45; Luke 5:12-16). The leper 
came believing; Christ even touched him and healed him; 
and charged him to be quiet about it; to go to Jerusalem to 
show himself to the priest and make the required offering. 
But this man disobeyed Jesus and “spread abroad the mat- 
ter” and hindered Christ’s real synagogue ministry by his 
unbridled and thoughtless enthusiasm. Herein we have 
much material to understand Christ’s attitude toward His 
own power, the sick, the institutions of His day and even 
the Jewish religion, as well as the method of work which 
He preferred to use. 

He used this power to heal this leper because He was 
“moved with compassion” (Mark 1:41). He willed to help 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 109 


and heal because He felt. Then, as now, He was touched 
with the feeling of infirmity. He even broke through “regu- 
lations” and “touched him.” ‘That leper should not have 
come within six feet of Christ and if the wind had been 
blowing otherwise than leeward one hundred feet. But 
Jesus did not reproach him for violations of law but actually 
dared to touch him, He came in contact with the leper. 
Oh! how that outcast from society, that man who was a 
living corpse, whose cry of “Unclean, unclean” was his 
own funeral dirge, whose robe was his shroud, how he 
enjoyed that touch. How Christ’s “I will” was music to 
those ears that heard no prayers even except those of hope- 
lessness and despair. For there was no power either in 
magic or medicine or in Jewish religion to heal a leper. 
Their attitude is described as “heartlessness.” Yet contrast 
Christ’s reception of this leper. Such a contrast was to be 
expected. Rabbis were men; Christ was the God-man. 
Elisha came not near Naaman, the Syrian, but Elisha was 
just a man, though a prophet; Christ touched a leper, as 
God might do without defilement. To show that the Jews 
were dull in interpreting even their own conceptions of the 
predicted Messiah when the interpretations are applied to 
Christ we note that He was called “ ‘the Leprous,’ the King 
Messiah being represented as seated in the entrance to Rome, 
surrounded by, and relieving, all misery and disease, in ful- 
fillment of Isaiah 53: 4.” 

The leper had confidence in Christ. Christ had heal- 
ing for the leper. So it is, He casts away none that 
come. 

But Jesus seemed so eager to conceal His labor of love, 
His work of power, that He besought the man to go to the 
priest in silence, expressly “for a testimony unto them.” 
The priest needed the witness. If Christ healed leprosy 
He was more than an ordinary Rabbi. And, again, Jesus 
did not want the publicity, which, when it came, drove Him 
to the “desert places” (Mark 1:45)). When embarrassed 
by popularity and curiosity Jesus had to withdraw to pray. 
Yet they sought Him. 

But He was also sought and haunted and hounded by 
“familiars” of the Jewish authorities who were “making a 


110 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


case” against Him. Yet He manifested Himself to them 
by deeds of power and even recognized their organization 
as is shown by His sending the healed leper to the priest. 


§ 41. The Paralytic Borne of Four. Mat. 9: (1) 2-8. 
Mark 2:1-12. Luke 5: 17-26. 


Jesus had been preaching in Galilee. ‘“The gospel of the 
kingdom” was His theme. He had healed “all manner of 
sickness among the people.” ‘The case of the leper is prob- 
ably given as a typical case, or as a sample of just how He 
did His work. 

Then Jesus returned to Capernaum for a little. Soon the 
news spread that He was “at home.” Whereupon a great 
crowd filled the house “so that there was no longer room, 
no, not even about the door.” Jesus availed Himself of the 
opportunity and “spake the word unto them.”’ As the sequel 
clearly indicates in the house of Peter were “‘scribes.”” Prob- 
ably, as Geikie believes, these occupied seats near Jesus. 
These were there not with friendly motive. So averse were 
they to Jesus that Edersheim likens their attitude to the 
Master to that of the priests of Baal on Mt. Carmel toward 
Elijah. 

Jesus was a “new voice’ among Rabbis. He was a prob- 
lem to the scribes. From their training and view point 
they could not but look upon Him with suspicion so we can 
well imagine how they scrutinized Him on this occasion. 

The Rabbis led the Jewish nation, since they were the re- 
ligious heads and with the best Jews their religion was their 
life. At least it controlled their life. “They were the theolo- 
gians, the jurists, the legislatures, the politicians, and indeed, 
the soul of Israel. The priest had sunk to a subordinate place 
in the public regard.”—Geike. ‘The Rabbis were reverenced 
because they represented the law. ‘They were honored in 
the street, the synagogue and the home, much as ministers 
are today among some people. For example, in a Norwegian 
home the minister, when present as a guest, really presides 
at the table as a host. This gives him authority and enables 
him to impress religion upon the home life. ‘Wise in their 
generation, they fostered this homage by external aids. 
Their long robes, their broad phylacteries, or prayer fillets, 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 111 


on their forehead and arm, their conspicious Tephilin, with 
the sacred tassels dangling from each corner, were part of 
themselves, without which they were never seen.” They 
were venerated, and so easily controlled Jerusalem. 

- When the audience had assembled in Peter’s house four 
men came bearing a palsied man on a hammock. ‘To their 
dismay access to Jesus was impossible, so great was the 
crowd. But though they halted momentarily the “four” 
were not discouraged nor deterred from reaching Christ. 
Those oriental houses had a stairway leading to the roof 
from the outside of the house. So it would be possible to go 
up to the roof and then draw the palsied-one’s hammock to 
the roof by means of ropes. Evidently this was done and 
then a hole was made through the roof and thus access was 
gained to the very feet of the Master. We here remark 
that roofs of oriental houses were not made like our roofs. 
Edersheim believes that Christ stood under the covered gal- 
lery of Peter’s house, which was built after the pattern of 
houses of the middle class. He says, “In such case it would 
have been comparatively easy to ‘unroof’ the covering of 
‘tiles, and then, ‘having dug out’ an opening through the 
lighter framework which supported the ‘tiles’ to let down 
their burden ‘into the midst before Jesus.’ ”’ 

Although they were accustomed to have the sick crowding 
about the Master yet here was something new. And surely 
all present were attentive to the descending hammock con- 
veying a poor palsied man so eager for healing that he 


risked such a round about and unusual way of approach to 
Christ. 


The sick man in the presence of Him who was the Hope 
of health was not without trepidation. Jesus must have 
noted the invalid’s fear. Probably his experience in getting 
to Christ had used up his strength and left him weak and 
worn, if not worried. But Jesus saw his heart and addressed 
him with “Child, be of good cheer; thy sins are forgiven 
thee.”’ 


But it was not only fear that Jesus was dissipating, but 
He was also dispelling a conviction of: sins by forgiving 
those sins. Why did Jesus speak of forgiving sins? Did 
the man realize that his sins had brought on his sickness 


112 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


and that his sins and his sickness were connected? We believe 
that Christ “read at a glance” the real need and longing of 
his heart. Jesus granted him forgiveness first. 

But scribes present began to whisper their criticisms. 
They recognized the “blasphemy.” No Rabbi would dare 
to forgive sins. “Who can forgive sins but one, even God ?” 
From the point of view of the Rabbis the “scribes sitting 
there’ were right. God alone could forgive sins. So when He 
forgave the palsied man of his sins He did it not as a man 
but as the “Son of man,” the God-man. When challenged 
by the “reasoning” of the scribes He affirmed that it was 
just as easy to forgive sins as to heal. (Mark 2:9). And 
to make good His right to forgive He healed the paralytic 
(Mark 2: 10-12). The healing was so evident that ‘They 
were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, ‘We never saw it 
on this fashion,’ ”’ 


We can easily imagine the discomfiture of the scribes 
who were put to shame by this signal manifestation of 
power. Power this Nazarene evidently had over disease; 
and power He professed to have to forgive sin. And the 
people had been amazed by Him. The scribes saw their 
power slipping away from them. In the words of the 
Chinese, they were “losing face.” 


Since only God could forgive sins, and to the Jewish 
teachers Jesus was not God, therefore Jesus could not for- 
give sins. Hence He blasphemed even though He possessed 
power. Rabbis revered the past. ‘They had all the con- 
servatism of lawyers” (Geikie). Jesus could point to no 
precedent that would warrant His professing to forgive 
sins. So He was an “Innovator,” and so dangerous. There- 
fore He excited the scribes because He seemed to “intrude 
on divine rights.” Wad they only granted His deity all 
would have been easy. But this they did not do and Jesus 
surely read in their antagonism that which would nail Him 
to the cross. Calvary loomed up in the distance. As yet 
Jesus “carried the people with him,” but He had arrayed 
against Him the “power behind the throne,” the Pharisees, 
“The die had been cast.”” Unbending, petrified religion was 
destined to send Him to that most horrible of all deaths, 
crucifixion. 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 113 


§ 42. The Call of Matthew. Matthew 9: 9-13. 
Mark 2:13-17. Luke 5: 27-32. 


I 


CALLED To DISCIPLESHIP 


Matthew belonged to that despised class in the Roman 
Empire, the taxgatherers. A publican was held in con- 
tempt. The Jews of Palestine had religious scruples about 
paying tax to a king who did not represent Jehovah. So the 
taxgatherer received the hatred that was felt toward the 
whole tax business. 

When we study the subject of Roman taxation we do not 
wonder that the Jews resented the publican. Imports, ex- 
ports, goods bought and sold, bridge-money, road-money, 
town-dues, etc., meant quite an outlay of money. But this 
was not all. So many different objects were taxed that 
even modern scholars with all their research have not been 
able to identify all the names. The tax percentage ranged 
from 214-1214% of the article. Modern objectors to 
income tax would have felt keenly Rome’s extortion. Col- 
lectors would stop one on his journey, unload his pack 
animals, scatter his goods about and even open private let- 
ters. The taxgatherer was supreme. ‘The were oppressors. 
Partiality was common among them. They refunded to 
favorites but exacted from others. At times the good ass 
of a defenceless person was taken and a poor one given in 
its place. 

A mokhes, or collector, was “great” if he had others really 
do the work, but ‘“‘small” if he did it himself. Since Matthew 
was “sitting at the receipt of custom” in person, he was 
very greatly despised. 

There is a case of a taxgatherer becoming a noted Rabbi 
and the fact that he had been a collector of toll depriving 
him from intercourse with his very rigid colleagues. We see 
how the Jews were prejudiced against the publicans. Yet 
Jesus called one to discipleship. It is clear that Jesus had 
standards not those of experts on religion among the Jews. 
It is even so today. Wherever you go you meet people who 
by their office or family or place of residence are supposed to 


114 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


be doomed to obscurity if not damnation. They really are 
bound as are the Hindoos by their caste. Yet Jesus still 
calls. 


II 
RESPONSE TO THE CALL 


How meaningful are those words “And he arose and 
followed him.” Matthew had often sat before his custom 
house near the sea and watched the crowds about Jesus. 
He had heard His gracious words and wondered at His 
miraculous works. Probably he had heard Him speak at 
the synagogue. Matthew was won. He saw in this Rabbi 
something different than in the other Rabbis. Jesus’ pres- 
ence and speech gave him hope. Though the Rabbis had 
ruled that repentance was specially difficult for taxgatherers 
and herdsmen, yet Matthew was attracted to Jesus and 
encouraged to hope on by his very bearing. With what 
eagerness must Matthew have responded to Christ’s wel- 
come. His “follow me” was music to his ears. So Mat- 
thew lost no time. “He arose and followed him.” 

What an encouragement that must have been to many a 
poor outcast of Israel. Even publicans had a place with 
Jesus of Nazareth. 

Does not the history of the Church teem with those of the 
Matthew type—men and women outside the pale of the pos- 
sibility of salvation and service? We will venture to name 
St. Augustine, John Bunyan, Jerry McAuley and Samuel 
Hadley. We think of a miner, a cobbler, a base ball player 
and a pugilist—all saved to serve because Jesus cast His 
longing, loving eye, filled with hope, in their direction and 
said, ‘Follow me,” and they “followed him.” 


Ill 


Tue Frast In MattHew’s House 


After Matthew’s call the Master was a welcome guest in 
his home, as were the other disciples of Jesus. There is a 
beautiful community of interest among the true followers 
of Christ. Christianity teaches and practices a “levelling” 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 115 


socially. While they “sat at meat,’ publicans and sinners, 
likely former associates of Matthew, gathered round the 
table. ‘Then the Pharisees, who haunted Him, asked His 
disciples why their Master ate with publicans and sinners. 
Their object in thus criticizing Jesus to His disciples was 
evidently to inject evil into their minds and so prejudice 
them against Him. 

But Jesus heard their cavilling and came to the assistance 
of His disciples. He certainly “answered” the Pharisees. 
“They that are whole have no need of a physician; but they 
that are sick,” was His silencing utterance. In this state- 
ment Jesus contended against the exclusiveness of the 
Pharisees and justifies His mingling with the publican class. 
Why give attention to the well and avoid the sick if you 
would do the work of a physician? A physician must go 
right into the midst of germs to work his cures. Christ, the 
Great Physician, mingled with publicans to save them. 
Souls meant more to Him than time-worn traditions. He 
leaped over barriers of Pharisaical prejudice to redeem 
precious souls. Jesus invited the Pharisees to “learn” the 
meaning of their own Scriptures. “I will have mercy and 
not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous but 
sinners.” All the mercy they knew or exercised was sacri- 
fice. Merit was everything. They knew not how to forgive 
without first knowing that penitence was done. ‘The Rabbis 
had to be sure of one’s penitence before welcoming him to 
God. So they made much of works. He had mercy and 
not sacrifice. , Rabbis insisted that people turn to the law 
and keep it before any forgiveness was assured. 

Christ forgave freely when He saw a heart longing for 
fellowship with Him. Christ forgave unconditionally; but 
the Rabbis never. "They weighed down those under them 
with burdens which they themselves could not bear. “If a 
person had sinned in one direction, he must not only avoid 
it for the future, but aim at doing all the more in the op- 
posite direction, or of overcoming sin in the same circum- 
stances of temptation.” 


Now, Jesus freely invites al] sinners to come into the 


room of grace by a step of faith. He welcomes them. 
“Rabbinism is only despair and a kind of Pessimism.” 


116 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Christ never put anybody on “probation.” His word is, 
“Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely.” 
So though Matthew and his kind were regarded as impos- 
sibilities religiously yet Jesus had time and hope for them. 

So today He sups with us and teaches us and stands off 
our accusers by His deeds, His words and His intercession. 


'§ 43. The Question About Fasting. Mat. 9: 14-17; 
Mark 2: 18-22; Luke 5: 33-39. 


John’s disciples and the Pharisees sought from Jesus an 
explanation. “Why” did Jesus’ disciples fail to fast while 
they were careful to fast? To their question Jesus made 
answer by two illustrations. His disciples were to Himself 
as the “sons of the bride-chamber” to the “bridegroom.” 
The “sons of the bride-chamber” or as we would say 
“groomsmen,” “rejoiced greatly because of the bridegroom’s 
voice” (John 3:29). They were happy to know that the 
bridegroom was with the bride and they listened to him 
talking to her and perhaps laughing with her. As they stood 
near the door of the bridal-chamber, they were glad to know 
that they had done their part well and that the groom, for 
whom they had served, was at last happy with his bride. 
His joy was an occasion for their gladness. 

Even so Jesus’ disciples rejoiced with Him in His success; 
for at that time He seems to be succeeding. People were 
thronging Him. Scribes were powerless before Him. ‘Their 
Teacher was increasing. John had decreased even as he 
foresaw (John 3:30). That “voice” was no longer “crying 
in the wilderness.” John had prepared the way of the Lord 
and Herod had thrown John the Baptist into prison. Little 
wonder his disciples felt like fasting. But as yet Jesus, 
“The Bridegroom,” was with His disciples. ‘They should 
enjoy Him and learn of Him while they had Him. Does 
Jesus not state clearly that one day He too would be sep- 
arated from His disciples? ‘Then will they fast.” He 
foresees His beloved disciples disconcerted by His death 
(cf. Luke 24), 

As the illustration of the “sons of the bride-chamber” 
and the “bridegroom” was probably intended for John’s 
disciples, so that of the incongruity of putting new patches 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 117 


on old garments or new wine into old skins was likely in- 
tended for the Pharisees. 

New patches would stretch and tear the old thread-bare 
garment and “the rent’ would be “worse.” New wine 
would cause the old time-worn skins to burst. So the patch 
should suit the garment and the wine skins should be strong 
enough to hold the wine. Just so the form of Christ’s 
teaching should be suitable to the substance. Why should 
His disciples imitate the Pharisees in their fasting? Jesus’ 
teaching was not part and parcel of that of the Pharisees. 
Christ was no reformer, much less an imitator. It was not 
fitting that His disciples should ape the Pharisees. Phar- 
isaical customs no more fitted Jesus’ disciple tham Saul’s 
armor fitted David. The “new wine” of Christ’s teaching 
must have “fresh skins” of outward conduct. Jesus taught 
a consistency between belief and life. New should go with 
new and old with old. The outward should express the in- 
ward; the attire, the attitude; the vessel should suit the 
contents. 


§ 44. The Infirm Man At the Pool of Bethesda. John 
5. 


Students of the etymology of Bethesda are in doubt as 
to the proper meaning of the word. The most likely how- 
ever are “House of Healing” and “House of Bubbling-up.” 
The name evidently came from the fact that there was lo- 
cated a pool whose waters were supposed to have curative 
properties after an angel had “troubled” them. Whoever, 
after the waters were troubled first stepped into the pool 
was healed according to “popular idea.” We can well 
imagine that many impotent folk would be on the five 
porches about the pool waiting for the troubling of the 
waters. There seems to be no doubt but that these waters 
bubbled from physical rather than supernatural causes. In- 
termittent springs are not uncommon. A spring known as 
the “Fountain of the Virgin’ in Jerusalem still bubbles at 
certain times but not continually. 

What we face is a set of facts very interesting and sug- 
gestive. To this wonderful pool many sick had come. 
Eagerly they waited for the moving of the waters. All 


118 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


believed in its healing powers. Jesus comes on to the 
porches, possibly to avoid the crowds, possibly attracted by 
human suffering. He noticed “a certain man there, which 
had been thirty and eight years in his infirmity.” Two 
things about this man impressed Jesus: first, the fact that 
he was “lying there’; i. e., his impotent condition; second, 
the fact that for so long a time he had thus been indisposed 
(verse 6). So Jesus directed a question at him, an ap- 
parently useless question, “Wouldst thou be made whole?” 
Why was he there unless to be made whole? But the man’s 
answer indicates that he was on the verge of discouragement, 
if not despair. He could not help himself quickly enough. 
A younger, less infirm person, always beat him to the pool. 
He hoped against hope. He saw no chance of being made 
whole. Jesus searched him out to see if he recognized his 
extremity. This man was so taken up with the hopelessness 
of his case that he did not even affirm that he desired to be 
healed. What was the use? Could he expect this unknown 
man to stay near enough to put him into the waters? To 
such a man Jesus said, “Arise, take up thy bed and walk.” 
And Jesus’ word of command was accompanied by His 
work of healing, for “straightway the man was made whole, 
and took up his bed and walked.” 


In this scene at the Pool of Bethesda we see reflected 
many an analogous picture protraying conditions in life. As 
impotent humanity is lying hopeful but almost helpless on 
the edge of pools of their own choosing—pools of supersti- 
tion, pools of legalism, pools of emotionalism—Jesus, ever 
present where the need is the greatest, goes up and down in 
their midst. There you find Him rather than in the midst 
of the strong, well, the self-sufficient for “They that are 
whole need not a physician but they that are sick.” And 
the Great Physician attends particularly to those whose 
cases are hopeless—hopeless because they cannot apply even 
the poor remedy that they know. Yet they linger at the 
pool sharing their miseries with others of like condition. 
To such the Master’s authoritative and energizing, “Arise, 
take up thy bed, and walk,” is a signal to start life again. 
It is the satisfaction of lingering desire; it is the “substance 
of things hoped for’’; it is life instead of death. 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 119 


What Christ did for the infirm man was good, very good. 
He always did the good, never the evil. Yet the Jews, being 
unable to gainsay what He did, took offence at when He 
did it. So a new scene arises growing out of the fact ex- 
pressed in the words, “Now it was the sabbath on that day’’ 
(verse 9). 

Lo, a man may be languishing on a mat of pain and the 
religious Jews care nothing for it. But let that man take up 
that old mat and carry it away to scenes not flooded with 
memories of ills and disappointments and those same Jews 
are incensed, because say they, “It is the sabbath and it is 
not lawful for thee to take up thy bed.” ‘This carrying of 
the bed was an infringement of the Sabbatic law, as inter- 
perted by traditionalism. The Jews saw the external in- 
fringement of the law, but did not see the blessing of health 
which the healed man enjoyed. So they asked who it was 
that had commanded him to take up his bed and walk rather 
than who had made him whole. They were more inter- 
ested in the punishment of a law-breaker than in the honor- 
ing of a benefactor. How sectarian were they! How 
narrow! How selfish! Yet legalism is ever so. Those 
who conform not are forbidden. 

Now the scribe has spun out endless exactions relative to 
Sabbath-keeping. The tying of knots of camel drivers and 
sailors was unlawful. It was equally illegal to untie them, 
yet “A knot which could be untied with one hand might be 
undone.” ‘The quantity of food that might be carried on 
Sabbath “must be less in bulk than a dried fig; if of honey, 
only as much as would anoint a wound; if water, as much 
as would make eye-salve; if paper, as much as would be 
put in a phylactery; if ink, as much as would form two 
letters.” —Getkte. 

But the priests and scribes were not always careful to 
observe their own regulations relative to Sabbath-keeping. 
Yet they paraded their “hollow puritanism” when Jesus bade 
the healed man carry his sleeping-mat. 

Strange as it may seem at first, yet true it was that the 
healed man did not know who had restored him to health. 
It was just one of those situations in life when things 
happen so unusually that some of the actors play their 


120 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


parts poorly. One would have thought that gratitude would 
have prompted him to get the name of Jesus and later re- 
ward his benefactor, but lo, he does not even know the name 
of this wonder-working One (v. 13). And the reason given 
for this, as stated here, was not so much the fault of him 
that was healed as the disposition of Jesus to avoid no- 
toriety: “for Jesus had conveyed himself away, a multi- 
tude being in the place.” 

Later, Jesus met him and bade him “sin no more, least a 
worse thing come upon” him. This gave the healed man 
information desired and he soon told the Jews who had 
healed him possibly to magnify his benefactor in their eyes, 
or more likely to rid himself of the responsibility of carry- 
ing his bed on a Sabbath day. 

Then the Jews did “persecute” Jesus. But Jesus con- 
tended “My Father worketh even until now, and I work.” 
In this statement Jesus put a new interpretation upon Sab- 
bath-keeping. “God’s rest was truly that of beneficence, 
not of inactivity,” says Edersheim. But the Jews took up 
His statement of verse 17 as a sufficient reason that He 
should be killed. Said they, “He not only brake the sab- 
bath, but also called God his own Father, making himself 
equal with God.” Jesus did not deny that He regarded 
Himself as equal with God. He admitted it tacitly and even 
went on to show how He and the Father were alike. What 
a rebuke this is to those of Arian tendencies who will not 
agree that Jesus is “coequal, coeternal, and coessential” with 
the Father. Note then the assertions of Jesus as to the 
points of equality between Himself and His Father. 


a. Equal in power, vs. 20, 21, 28, 29. 

b. Equal in Honor—established by judgment power, vs. 
22, 2a; LEO: 

c. Equal in life-giving and is self-consistent, vs. 24, 25, 
26. 


Then Jesus goes about to substantiate His claims as to 
fis equality with God by calling on witnesses whose testi- 
mony the Jews would have been expected to receive; viz., 


(a) His works and words as from God (vs. 30-32, 36, 37) ; 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 121 


(b) John the Baptist (vs. 33-35); (c) Scriptures (v. 39), 
Moses (vs. 46, 47). 


In verses 30-47 Jesus is very explicit. Nothing is con- 
cealed. He simply smothers the Jews with truth. He 
points to the divine character of His words and works as 
evidence of His deity. He reminds the Jews how John the 
Baptist had testified of Him and in John’s light they “were 
willing to rejoice for a season.” John’s ministry they 
recognized for a time. Then why not heed what John said 
of Christ? He told them that they did ‘Search the scrip- 
tures, because” said He, “ye think that in them ye have 
eternal life.’ They were diligent in studying the Bible be- 
cause they imagined that therein they would find life ever- 
lasting. Yet these very Scriptures “are they which bear 
witness of me,” said He, “‘and ye will not come to me that 
ye may have life.” ‘hey read a Book describing Christ, 
yet did not recognize the One described. How poorly they 
read! They took the Bible as the “Fountain of Life’ rather 
than as a road leading to the “Fountain.” They thought 
that in the Scriptures they would find life. Their precon- 
ceived ideas made them literalists, traditionalists, worship- 
pers of a Book rather than of the living, loving Christ about 
whom the Book was written. Herein is suggested a subtle 
Bibliolatry. Beloved, we must get Christ out of the Book 
or through the Book to the living Christ. Would you know 
the Christ of the Gospels if He were to appear in our midst? 
What solemn, awful, pathetic words are these, “Ye search 
the scriptures . . . and ye will not come to me that ye 
may have life.” ‘The letter killeth; the Spirit giveth life.” 
The Bible is not a puzzle. Turn it over and see the man 
on the other side; as the children were enabled to put a 
map of the U. S. A. together by piecing the bust of our 
First President, found on the other side of the parts of the 
puzzle, so the Bible will mean something to us when we 
have seen the man back of it—the God-man. 

Jesus boldly asserted to these Jews that He received no 
glory from men, and that they had “not the love of God in” 
themselves. He had clearly broken with the Jews. They 
hated Him. 


122 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 45. The Disciples Plucking Grain. Mat. 12: 1-8; 
Mark 2: 23-28; Luke 6: 1-5. 


Jesus and His disciples were travelling through the grain 
fields on a sabbath day. His disciples were hungry. Says 
Geikie, “It was no wonder that both he and the disciples 
were hungry, for no Jew could break his fast till after the 
morning service at the synagogue, or take supper till after 
the evening service.” 

But when, under the eye of Jesus, the disciples “plucked” 
the grain, the Master was sanctioning a twofold offense; 
for the above-named process involved both “reaping” and 
“threshing,” according to the exacting Pharisees who were 
shadowing Jesus at every turn. And in no particular did 
He give more occasion for offense than in His attitude 
toward the Sabbath. Edersheim says, “On no other sub- 
ject is Rabbinic teaching more painfully minute and more 
manifestly incongruous to its professed object.’ Pharisaic 
laws of Sabbath observance had two evident objects, nega- 
tively, they aimed to provide rest, and positively, they at- 
tempted to make the sabbath a delight. ‘The Mishnah in- 
cludes Sabbath desecration among those most heinous crimes 
for which a man was to be stoned.” So ordinances were 
provided which were supposed to make a breach of Sabbath 
rest impossible and to make the Sabbath a delight. At great 
sacrifice suitable food and clothing would be provided so 
that the Sabbath might be more appropriately kept. Mourn- 
ing on the Sabbath was prohibited, for, said they, the Scrip- 
ture, ‘“The blessing of the Lord, it maketh rich, and he 
addeth no sorrow with it,” is applicable to the Sabbath day. 

Just how burdensome and exacting were the Sabbath re- 
strictions may be judged from the following Talmudic pas- 
sage: “In case a woman rolls wheat to remove the husks, 
it is considered as sifting; if she rubs the heads of wheat, 
it is regarded as threshing; if she cleans off the side-ad- 
herences, it is sifting out fruit; if she bruises the ears, it 
is grinding; if she throws them up in the air, it is win- 
nowing.” 

When Jesus was pressed, by His critics, for breaking their 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY = 123 


Sabbath laws, He defended Himself and His disciples by 
references to David’s eating the shew-bread on the Sabbath 
and to the activity of the priests on that holy day. It is to 
be noted that David did this ‘‘when he was an hungered.” 
Does this not argue that the insistent craving of the normal 
appetite, the nature with which God has endowed His crea- 
tures, is more to be regarded than some human conception 
of Sabbath observance? Is it not as P. Whitwell Wilson 
remarks, that ‘‘no symbol of God is so sacred as man created 
in His image?” ‘Then too, David was in God’s service and 
so should be strengthened with food in order that he might 
the better render that service. ‘Though he were not the 
priest yet he was king, and there are exigencies in life when 
any man may become both priest and king. 


In order for the temple service to be carried out it was 
necessary for the priests to perform their duties. Hence in 
the words of Jesus they “profane the sabbath.” But said 
He, “they are guiltless.’”’ And since they who only served 
in the temple were guiltless, though they wrought on the 
Sabbath day, why should He that is “greater than the 
temple’’ be considered guilty for ministering to his own body 
and the bodies of His disciples, all of them temples of the 
Holy Spirit? ‘The priests were doing God’s service and 
were guiltless: on the same ground David was guiltless 
though he wrought on the Sabbath day. Was not Jesus 
doing His Father’s will on all the days? As Matthew 12:7 
indicates, mercy is above sacrifice. Mercy would permit 
hungry men to satisfy themselves with grain plucked off 
and rubbed out on the Sabbath. 


Then Jesus pleaded an even better reason for His action 
and attitude. It was that He was ‘Lord of the Sabbath.” 
Says Edersheim, “He is Lord of the Sabbath, whom we 
serve in and through the Sabbath. And even this is sig- 
nificant, that, when designating Himself Lord of Sabbath, 
it is as ‘the Son of Man.’”’ As Geikie explains, He was the 
“representative of man as man.” Jesus realized that “The 
Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath.” 
Christ “proclaimed spiritual freedom.” 


124 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 46. The Man With the Withered Hand. Mat. 12: 
9-14; Mark 3:1-6; Luke 6: 6-11. 


In each of the Synoptic Gospels the record of the healing 
of the man with the withered hand immediately follows that 
of the incident of the plucking and eating of the grain on 
the Sabbath. In each instance Jesus came into collision with 
the Pharisaical party. Both incidents occurred on a Sab- 
bath and each subjected Jesus to criticism as to His attitude 
toward the Rabbinic interpretation and regulations with 
respect to the Sabbath. 

The Master, ministering in the synagogue, was aware of 
the presence of a needy man. Before Him seated amidst 
the others was “the man with the withered hand.” ‘“Accord- 
ing to St. Jerome (comm. on, Mat. 12:13), in the Gospel of 
the Nazarenes and Ebionites, this man was described as a 
mason, and that he had besought Jesus to restore him, so 
that he might not have to beg for his bread.” Other tradi- 
tion refers to him as a bricklayer whose family was de- 
pendent upon him. 

On the other hand there was in the audience of Jesus a 
group representing the Pharisaical party, with hands whole, 
but with souls atrophied and hampered by legalistic restric- 
tions which made freedom of the individual conscience an 
impossibility. Possibly the man with the withered hand 
was there by their connivance. At least “the Scribes and 
the Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the 
Sabbath; that they might find how to accuse him.” Does 
not this indicate that they would lay a trap for Him? Geikie 
points out that “The hierarchy would . . . have indicted 
Him publicly, but for His wide popularity.” So they were 
eager to prejudice the common people against Him by call- 
ing to notice some infringement of the Sabbath law by 
Him. The Synagogue Service provided an occasion for 
this. 


But there does not seem to be perfect clearness about 
Jewish views of healing on the Sabbath. Says Edersheim, 
“We have already seen that in their view only actual danger 
to life warranted a breach of the Sabbath Law. But this 
opened a large field for discussion.” For opinions differed 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 125 


as to what diseases were dangerous and superseded the Sab- 
bath law. “All applications to the outside of the body were 
forbidden on the Sabbath . . . Internal remedies, such as 
were used in health, but had also a remedial effect, might 
be taken,” etc. Aid might be given one who had swallowed 
glass; a splinter or a thorn might be removed. 


When Jesus healed the man with the withered hand He 
was acting in conformity to the general principle of the 
Rabbis that it is lawful to do that which saves life on the 
Sabbath (Mark 3:4; Luke 6:9). Jesus brings this prin- 
ciple most vividly to their attention by citing the case of a 
sheep being lifted out of a pit on the Sabbath (Mat. 12:11). 
His argument is, “How much then is a man of more value 
than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do good on the 
sabbath day” (Mat. 12:12). If a sheep’s life should be 
saved on a sabbath, evidently because it is of more value even 
than the sanctity of the Sabbath, why not save a man’s 
life on the Sabbath? Or if his usefulness was impaired by 
a withered member why not restore that member? Cer- 
tainly a hand of a man counts for more than a sheep’s life. 
But in their religious prejudice a man’s hand mattered little 
to the Pharisaical party. Tradition was greater than life. 
As P. Whitwell Wilson says, “Here, as in the Temple, they 
paid more attention to bulls and goats than to men and 
women.” But more valuable than bulls or goats or men 
were those interpretations and amplifications of the law, 
traditions moss-covered if not worm-eaten, yet cherished as 
the quintessence of religion. And they despised and yearned 
for the death of any teacher who would dare to deviate one 
iota from the narrow path of Rabbinic restriction. 


In the presence of a cold, calculating, critical casuistry on 
the one hand, and a man with a withered right hand on the 
other, Jesus was challenged to be a timorous time-server or 
a champion of the truth. Luke notes that it was the “right 
hand” that was “withered” (Lu. 6:6). Why should this 
man or any man go through life with his strength and 
dexterity dangling at his side or concealed under his coat 
for very shame? Why should a man be less than a man? 
Because of alaw? ‘Then scrap the law! Thus our Master, 
of whom the woman of Samaria said, “Come see a man,” 


126 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS . 


must have reasoned. But he needed not waste many syl- 
logisms on the issue before Him. He expressed His heart 
to His critics and His friends (for both were in His pres- 
ence) in the question, ‘Is it lawful to do good on the Sab- 
bath day or to do harm? to save life or to kill?” To delay 
in the presence of disease over which He had power was the 
same as to kill; the equivalent to doing harm. So Jesus 
acted. But not until “He had looked round about on them 
with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their heart.” 
That indescribable look of anger and grief should have 
melted any heart. And why that look? Mark answers our 
question in 3: 4b: “But they held their peace.” Jesus’ ref- 
erence to the sheep in the pit had not aroused their sense 
of pity and charity. By relating that homely suppositional 
case Jesus said to them, “As a poor helpless lamb in a hole, 
so appeals to the ‘milk of human kindness’ in any man that 
he must help it out, so this helpless right hand appeals to 
me. It would be just as wrong morally for me to pass by 
this unfortunate cripple as for any of you to ignore the 
pleading eyes of the little lamb or sheep.” Jesus saw the 
restoring of the useless hand to normalcy as His first duty. 
(Note that the narratives all indicate that Jesus’ attention 
was first fixed on this man. I judge this from the position 
in 3 Synoptists: Mat.9:10; Mk. 3:1; Lu.6:6.) Yet He 
did not restore the shrunken member until He, by a look, 
had rebuked the hard-hearted silence of the Pharisaical 
party. These men “held their peace” though there was be- 
fore them a pitiable cripple who should have melted their 
hearts to a point of compassion; they would not commit 
themselves that Jesus had a right to heal the man though He 
appealed to their reason. They were time-servers. -Like 
Pilate they were “Opportunists.” They sinned against them- 
selves in not admitting that Jesus should restore the with- 
ered hand on the Sabbath day. 

But Jesus did say, “Stretch forth thy hand.” “And he 
stretched it forth: and his hand was restored.”’ Then those 
Pharisees “were filled with madness.” ‘They did a foolish 
thing when they rejected Jesus. And they continued on in 
their folly. “Their fanaticism, now fairly aroused, forgot 
all minor hatreds, and united the hostile factions of the 


FIRST PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 127 


nation in common zeal for his destruction. No parties could 
be more opposed than the nationalists or Pharisees, and the 
Friends of Rome gathered round Herod Antipas at Tiberias, 
but they now united to hunt Jesus to death . . . The 
Church and the State had banded together to put ‘the de- 
ceiver of the people’ out of the way as soon as possible.’”’— 
Getkie. 


aig) NP 


; by iv : 
ant 


PA , 
qc Yeats 
A 7 
* te j 


ie 





PART V 
Second Period of the Galilean Mimstry 


x ve 
4 th & ay 
va 


He 





SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 


FROM THE CHOOSING OF THE TWELVE UNTIL THE WITH- 
DRAWAL INTO NORTHERN GALILEE 


§ 47. The Widespread Fame of Christ. Mat. 4: 23- 
25; 12: 15-21; Mark 3: 7-12; Luke 6: 17-19. 


The fame that Jesus had through such mighty works as 
restoring the ‘“‘withered hand” (§ 46), and the enmity 
of such powerful groups as the Herodians and Pharisees, 
only attracted to Him more people (Mk. 3:7; Lu. 6:17). 
In order to avoid unnecessary hostility, Jesus “withdrew 
to the sea,’ where His beneficent works were continued. 
He had become an attractive figure in the life of Galilee. 
Yet He was by no means a local character. From afar the 
eager, if not excited, multitude swarmed to Him—“From 
Jerusalem and Idumea on the south; from Perea and De- 
capolis and other parts on the east; and even from the 
heathen district of Tyre and Sidon on the north.” Jesus 
was so surrounded that He called for a boat lest He would 
become distressed with the crowd. Here on the Sea of 
Galilee He performed His accustomed miracles. But as 
usual He charged those receiving benefit to be silent. 


In this desire of the Master, to have His works done 
quietly yet faithfully and well, Matthew sees the fulfillment 
of the prophecy of that ideal “Servant of Jehovah” so fully 
elaborated by Isaiah. He is portrayed as Jehovah’s chosen 
servant, well-pleasing to God, endued with the Spirit of the 
Lord, and even being destined to judge not only Jews but 
Gentiles yet as an ideal “Servant of the Lord.” He would 
not strive (cf. Mat. 12:19 with 2 Tim. 2: 24), nor advertise 
Himself (Mat. 12:19), but would rather manifest such 
gentleness, tenderness and care that the weak, timid, sick 
and suffering would have heart to approach Him. He 
would not break the “bruised reed” (Mat. 12:20a) but 
rather “Bind up the broken-hearted.” He came not to crush 
but to cure. He would not extinguish the dimly lighted 

131 


132 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


flaxen wick even as His spirit has enflamed many whose love 
had waxed cold. As a Servant He can afford to patiently 
plod on, knowing that ‘Power comes through service.” He 
exemplified that only those who serve well can reign well. 
His time to ‘“‘send forth judgment unto victory” had not yet 
come. Like His remote ancestor after the flesh, David, He 
could bide his time until the throne was really ready for 
Him. May we all learn of this “Servant of servants,’ 
whose gentleness made Him great. In the words of Thomas 
Gray He never would ‘‘wade through slaughter to a throne, 
and shut the gates of mercy on mankind.” 

His accessibility, His ““Son-of-Man” spirit, makes for that 
attractiveness which realized the prophecy, “And in his 
name shall the Gentiles hope [or trust]” Rev. Charles 
Stelzle puts it as follows: “It is peculiar that Jesus appeals 
to men of all nations. Moses was a Hebrew, Socrates an 
Athenian, Confucius a Chinaman, Buddha a Hindu, Mo- 
hammed an Arab and Luther a German. But Jesus belongs 
as much to the African as to the American. He is loved by 
the Chinese as He is by the Choctaw Indians. To the 
Welshman Christ seems to have been a Welshman. To the 
Arabian, Christ seems to have been an Arabian. No matter 
what a man’s nationality he feels at home with Jesus.” The 
hunter, robed in a deerskin, can draw nearer any deer, so 
Christ, clothed in human form draws near to all humanity. 
Ah! the wish of “the Great Shepherd of the Sheep”’ is that 
all the sheep might hear His voice and come to Him that 
there might be “one flock, one fold, one Shepherd.” 


§ 48. The Choosing of the Twelve. Mat. 10:2-4; 
Mk. 3: 13-19; Lu. 6: 12-19. 


In this section the following points of interest are to be 
noted : 
The twelve were supernaturally endowed (v. 1). 
They were definitely designated (vs. 2, 4). 

Each one was an individual. 
Their field of labor was restricted (vs. 5, 6). 
. Their message was definite (v. 7). 
They were bidden to an unsparing ministry (v. 8). 
They were to “travel light” (vs. 9, 10). 


Dupo Ne 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 133 


§ 49. The Sermon on the Mount. Mat., Chapters 5, 
6, 7, 8:1; Luke 6: 20-49. 


Students of this section of Gospel narrative vie with 
each other in finding terms sufficiently lofty to describe 
their thoughts and emotions as they contemplate what is 
herein contained. Here we have the simple yet the sublime. 
We ponder what seems the impossible and impractical. 
There it stands comparatively untried, a challenge to the 
saintliest, a standard for true followers of Christ, a state- 
ment from our Master assuring us of better things yet to be. 


Men differ as to whether or not the “Sermon on the 
Mount” is a sermon, but they all recognize that it comes 
from a mount. It comes down to us. 


Mounts, by the way, are prominent in Bible history. “It 
was on a mountain that Moses received the law from God; 
and Elijah, the fire . . . that our Lord was tempted, that 
He taught, and prayed, and was transfigured and suffered; 
from a mountain, He ascends to heaven. All the supreme 
events of his life were thus lofty and universal,” etc.—“The 
Christ We Forget,’ Wilson. 

Matthew 5, 6, and 7 contains mountain-top matter. “If 
an angel, come down to us from the world above, should 
ask us what our most precious possession is, the master- 
work of the Spirit at the height of its power, . . . we would 
offer him the Sermon on the Mount, and afterwards, only 
afterwards, a few hundred pages taken from the poets of all 
the peoples. But the Sermon would be always the one re- 
fulgent diamond dimming with the clear splendor of its 
pure light the colored poverty of emeralds and sapphires.” 
—Papini. 

Here Christ “seeing the multitude’ goes “up into the 
mountain: and when he had sat down, his disciples came 
unto him: and he opened his mouth and taught them.” 
View these two verses composed mostly of monosyllables 
and see the meaning of it all. He teaches not from a ros- 
trum; He uses no preacher’s pulpit nor teacher’s “desk.” 
But simply seated on an elevation of land he opens his 
mouth and teaches his disciples who come to him from the 
multitude. And such teaching as it was! Says Wilson: 


134 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“Not asermon . . . but an edict or ukase, promulgated for 
all His subjects, by a Sovereign seated on a throne of His 
own choosing—not designed by men but one of the eternal 
hills. He did not consult the Emperor, or the Church, or 
the Sanhedrin, or the Parliament, or the Electors, but spoke 
with sole and personal authority.— “J say unto you.” Geikie 
notes that ‘““The choice of the twelve, and the Sermon on 
the Mount, were the final and distinct proclamation of His 
new position.” 

Edersheim, writing from the standpoint of a Jew who 
knew literature yet who came to the Sermon on the Mount 
as a new discovery simply because he had been a Jew in 
religion, tells of the wonder of this unique teaching and how 
it affects the “receptive soul when, in the silence of our 
moral wilderness, those voices first break on the ear, that 
had never before been wakened to them . .. So the 
travel-stained wanderer flings him down on the nearest 
height, to feast his eyes with the first sight of home in the 
still valley beneath; . . . so the weary prodigal leans his 
head in silent musing of mingled longing and rest on a 
mother’s knee. So, and much more; for, it is the voice of 
God which speaks to us in the cool of the evening, amidst 
the trees of the lost Garden; to us, who, in very shame and 
sorrow, hide, and yet even so hear, not words of judgment 
but of mercy, not concerning an irrevocable and impossible 
past, but concerning a real, and to us possible future, which 
is that past, only better, nearer, dearer—for, that it is not 
the human which has now to rise to the Divine, but the 
Divine which has come down to the human.” 


The same author refers to the striking contrast between 
the Talmud (the Jewish interpretation of the Mosaic law) 
and the Sermon on the Mount. The reading of half-a- 
dozen pages successively of any part of the Talmud “leaves. 
one” shocked, pained, amused or astounded. For beside the 
“wit and logic, quickness and readiness, earnestness, and 
zeal” there is found “terrible profanity, uncleanness, super- 
stition and folly.’”’ The Talmud savors of the “unspiritual,” 
the “anti-spiritual,”’ that which is “narrow nationalism,” 
so that it is so “unlike the New Testament,” that it is not 
easy to determine which, as the case may be, is greater, the 





SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 135 


ignorance or the presumption of those who put them “side 
by side.” ‘The converted Jew finds in the Sermon on the 
Mount that which is quite superior to the contents of the 
Talmud. 

In the Sermon on the Mount the humblest Christian finds 
ground for hope; the weakest sees his possible strength; 
the poorest his unbounded wealth. Herein the Master 
expresses unbounded confidence in those whom the 
world would scorn. Divine provision as herein set forth 
staggers us. “Christ places His disciples at once in the 
position to which all other teachers point as an end.” We 
shall study the Sermon by chapters. 


MatTtHEew V—BEATITUDES 


Edersheim is careful to note that “What others labor 
for, He [Christ] gives.” He places his disciples in the 
kingdom of heaven; He does not here demand but bestows. 
Blessings promised are not a “reward’’ of the spiritual state 

. nor yet. . . aresult. It is not because a man is poor 
in spirit that his is the Kingdom of Heaven, in the sense 
that the one state will grow into the other or be its result; 
still less is the one the reward of the other.”’ Christ is the 
connecting link; He is the “door” into the Kingdom. 
“Everything is in Jesus and Jesus everything.” In this 
greatest “Sermon” we see prominent “The Supremacy of 
love.”—G. Campbell Morgan. Evidently Jesus, the King 
on the throne, has good and sufficient reasons for dealing 
out the largesses that are promised in the “Beatitudes.” 
The Monarch has suitable gifts for his subjects; the Elder 
Brother for His brethren; He sees a heart preparation for 
His bounties. He endows where He will. He never 
lavishes amiss. 

The “Kingdom of Heaven” is for the “poor in spirit,” 
Luke 6:20 has it “Blessed are ye poor.” Some are “poor” 
yet not “poor in Spirit.” They are proud in spirit, haughty, 
affecting to be rich; feeling, talking, acting in so far as 
possible as if they were rich. No blessing is promised for 
these. Jesus refers to what Geikie is pleased to call “The 
contented poor who bear their burden meekly, since it comes 
from God.’ ‘These will have riches for poverty. Sur- 


136 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


rendered to God’s will in the present they are preparing their 
souls for entrance into future inheritance. 


Jesus gave little if any promise to the rich, who are sur- 
feited with earth’s offerings. These are “greedy for riches, 
the greatest obstacle to the true enrichment of the soul.” 
But Jesus had much consolation for the poor, but surely He 
did not encourage the “poor” to believe that poverty alone 
was a preparation for and a guarantee of the ‘““Kingdom of 
Heaven.” Such an attitude would betray imbecility. And 
as Papini suggests “He could not call to the fullness of the 
Kingdom of God for the dull and the imbecile.” For these 
are hardly aware of their own condition. But the “poor in 
spirit” are “painfully aware of their own spiritual poverty 

. of the moral indigence of most men.” Being thus 
willing to recognize the insecurity of their own kingdom 
of earth they look forward to and eagerly expect the king- 
dom of heaven. Of such, like Job of old, who in his poverty 
resignedly said, ““The Lord gave and the Lord taketh away, 
blessed be the name of the Lord;”’ of such it will be true 
that their latter end will be better than their former. 


“Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be com- 
forted.” To those mourners referred to here “Weeping 
may endure for a night but joy cometh in the morning.” 
They mourn genuinely as did the publican who prayed 
“God be merciful to me a sinner ;” or as did Jeremiah, “The 
Prophet of tears’ who wished that his head were waters 
and his “eyes a fountain of tears” that he might “weep for 
the slain of the daughter of his people night and day.” 
These experience a “godly sorrow for sin,” on the one hand, 
and realize that they “dwell in the midst of a people of 
unclean lips,” on the other. Their vision is keen. ‘Their 
senses are not so benumbed by sin that they are unable to 
perceive the pathetic condition of a sin-cursed world. ‘They. 
muse and so cannot easily be amused. Prophets to sterile 
ages seem like pessimists. They cannot share in the popular, 
shallow optimistic view of their age and so are desolate and 
hopeless except for the word of the Master. Like Haw- 
thorne’s character who gazed upon “The Great Stone Face” 
and could not be satisfied that passing heroes were its 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 137 


counterparts, yet who himself came to be like what he gazed 
upon, so these, having seen “The King in His beauty,” can- 
not be content with aught else than Him. They mourn over 
the tragedy of a ruined race, men marred by misdeeds, souls 
sullied by sin. ‘These ‘“‘cannot be comforted.” Yet they 
“shall be comforted.” For “Earth has no sorrow that 
heaven cannot heal.” There is balm in Gilead.. 


“Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.” 
These are they who quietly and calmly suffer wrong. ‘They 
fo not fly into a rage when injured, but commit their cause 
to Him who judges righteously. Their conduct demon- 
strates their faith in ‘The Judgment Seat of Christ.” ‘Their 
aim is not present possession, quick victory, but they believe 
that “He that keepeth his Spirit is better than he that 
taketh a city.” In their patience they possess their souls. 
Soon their power is felt. Never furious but always firm, 
they “may be down but never out.” Like the truth which 
they embody, if “crushed to earth they rise again.” Says 
Papini ‘“They are like water which is not hard to the touch, 
which seems to give way before other substances, but slowly 
rises, silently attacks, and calmly consumes, with the 
patience of years, the hardest granite.” | 

“Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteous- 
ness: for they shall be filled.” Matthew Henry points out 
that some think that these are they who crave justice among 
men. They wanta “square deal.” But they find men unfair. 
Those who have their cases in hand “neither fear God nor 
regard men.’ ‘To such persons hungering and thirsting, 
longing with all their souls, for down-right honesty and 
honor there will be given satisfaction. They may expect a 
city “Four Square” in ethics as well as in dimensions. 

- Then let us consider the righteousness of God as “‘that 
righteousness which God requires, which the Holy Spirit 
convinces of, which Christ became and which faith secures.” 
— Scofield. Men and women who are His disciples long 
for this. They are not satisfied with diluted righteousness. 
They yearn for the realization in their own lives of the Law 
which Jesus sums up in “Love all men,” etc. They rejoice 
to know that “Christ is made unto us . . . righteousness.” 
(1 Cor, 1:30). These will find in Christ all that they seek. 


138 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


He “will pour water on them that are thirsty and floods 
upon the dry ground.” 

“Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.” 
A merciful person is one who pities the sorry plight of 
another or others and stretches forth a hand to help. When 
the Psalmist speaks of God lifting him out of the miry 
clay and putting his feet upon a rock, he is thinking of the 
mercy of God. Tender mercy and compassion cause one to 
be charitable with the weak and erring. Shakespeare puts 
into Portia’s mouth his estimate of mercy, closing with the 
oft-quoted lines: 


“And earthly power doth then show likest God's 
When mercy seasons justice.” 


Jesus does not promise happiness to the just but to the 
merciful. Human frailty makes mercy necessary. And 
those who manifest it will in return experience it when over- 
taken in fault. “Whereas they shall have judgment with- 
out mercy, who have shown no mercy.” James 2: 13. 

“Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.” 
In his “Word Studies in the New Testament” Vincent gives 
a very interesting history of makarois here translated 
“blessed.”” It originally meant great and referred to out- 
ward prosperity or the state of being rich. “Its biblical use 
lifted it into the region of the spiritual’? which was even a 
higher employment of this beautiful word than even the 
philosophers had brought it into, for they had used it to 
refer to “inward correctness as the essence of happiness” 
rather than “outward propriety,” in which sense pagans had 
thought of it. So “the word passed up into the higher region 
of Christian thought, and was stamped with the Gospel 
signet, and laden with all the rich significance of Gospel 
blessedness.” This word shakes off “the Stoic’s asserted 
right of suicide as a refuge from human ills, and emphasizes 
something which thrives on trial and persecution, which 
glories in tribulation, which not only endures but conquers 
the world, and expects its crown in Heaven.” 

In this beatitude holiness (“pure in heart”) and happiness 
(“Blessed’’) are put together. Says Henry ‘Here is the 
most comprehensive character of the blessed; they are the 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 139 


pure in heart.” “Here is the most comprehensive comfort 
of the blessed; They shall see God.” 

David, conscious of heart pollution, cried out “Create in 
me a clean heart, O God.” The Christian’s sincere prayer 
is ever 

. “OQ wash me Thou, without, within, 
Or purge with fire if that must be, 
No matter how if only sin, 

Die out in me, die out in me.” 

The Christian’s buoyant hope and strong faith is “We 
know that when He shall appear we shall be like Him for 
we shall see Him as He is and every man that hath this hope 
[fixed] upon Him purifies himself even as He is pure.” 
Yes the “pure in heart” shall see God in Christ who is the 
“express image” of the “invisible God.’ This hope is as 
an anchor to the soul, keeping it steadfast amidst the storms 
of life. 

“Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called 
sons of God.” A peacemaker must be a man of peace. He 
must be of a peaceful disposition. He ever “studies to be 
quite.” He heeds the exhortation “If it be possible,..... 
- live peaceably with all men.” He is filled with “‘the 
wisdom which cometh down from above which is first pure, 
then peaceable.” He is the responsive recipient of the three- 
fold and oft-repeated greeting of the Holy Scriptures ‘““May 
grace, mercy and peace be multiplied.” His Captain is 
the “Prince of Peace.’’ He has been led by the Great 
Shepherd of the sheep to the “waters of quietness” and his 
soul has been hushed into a heavenly repose by their sooth- 
ing sound. 

But not only is a peace-maker a peaceful man but he is for 
peace. He wars against war, just as his Master “came not 
to cast peace on the earth but a sword.” He is at variance 
with conflict. Men who cry, “peace, peace when there 1s 
no peace” meet with his scorn. He even enters the fray at 
the risk of receiving blows, and thus shortens the contest. 
He receives not plaudits but rebuffs from men who enjoy 
fighting. But when the “‘sons of God” are manifested (Rom. 
8:19) for whom the whole creation, burdened and bruised 
by war, is longing, they will be recognized as the “peace- 
makers” rather than “peace-breakers” of earth, 


140 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteous- 
ness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.’ Now 
some folks are persecuted who claim to be righteous yet 
whose lives do not measure up to their profession. Of this 
class Peter speaks when he says “For what glory is it, if, 
when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patient- 
ly?” Spiritual prosperity, blessedness, is for those who have 
even suffered in body, for the sake of “justice.” When you 
stand for righteousness those that oppose it will persecute 
you. You may even be of the class of “victims of Faith” 
as described in Hebrews 11:35 b—“‘Of whom the world 
was not worthy.” ‘These were “stoned,” as Stephen, the 
Proto-martyr ; “sawn assunder,”’ as Isaiah, the Gospel proph- 
et; “wandered in deserts,” as did John the Baptist; were 
“in dens and caves of the earth,’ as David, Israel’s anointed 
King; “received not the promise,” “not accepting deliver- 
ance that they might obtain a better resurrection,” as Huss, 
Ridley, Latimer and thousands whose names, though not 
emblazoned among earth’s heroes and martyrs, are yet 
recorded in the Book of Life. When Martin Luther, by 
posting his 95 theses, had incurred the enmity of the Pope, 
his life was in jeopardy every hour; when John Knox, by 
his protests against the false in religion, had provoked the 
anger of the Queen of Scotland, he was exiled and forced 
to row as a galley slave; when Chrysostom, because of tell- 
ing the empress of her sins, was hated by royalty, he was 
deported and brought to a premature death. Yet these and 
all of their class endured this persecution because they were 
conscious of citizenship in “the kingdom of heaven.”’ When 
men regard the principles of the heavenly kingdom and 
respect the precepts of Him who was crucified as “King 
of the Jews” they are bound to run counter to “the princes 
of this world” who “crucified the Lord of glory.” ‘The 
Servant is not above his Lord.” ‘They opposed Him. They 
will oppose us if we are champions of the cause of right- 
eousness. 

Matthew 5:11, 12 teach that “happy” is the estate of 
those “reproached” (shamed, reviled) “persecuted” (fol- 
lowed by the injuries, taunts or calumnies of enemies) and 
falsely evil spoken of for Jesus’ sake. Though such treat- 

» 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 141 


ment is altogether unpleasant, naturally speaking, yet the 
Great Teacher bids those so tried to “Rejoice and be exceed- 
ing glad.” It is as James, our Lord’s brother says, “Count 
it all joy when ye fall into ‘all sorts of? trials.” 

And Jesus gives two reasons as a basis for our happiness 
in such circumstances: first, ‘“For great is your reward in 
heaven”; and second, ‘For so persecuted they the prophets 
which were before you.” The first is hope of a worth while 
reward; the second is the knowledge of being the successors 
of the old time prophets in suffering. 

Edersheim maintains that “the object of this first section 
was to present the Kingdom of God in its characteristic 
features.” ‘These “features” are embodied in the citizens 
of the Kingdom who are humble (vs. 3), sorrowful because 
of the sinful state of the world (vs. 4), “Meek,” (vs. 5) 
longing for justice (vs. 6), “merciful” to the unfortunate 
(vs. 7), “pure in heart” (vs. 8), “peaceable” (vs. 9), “per- 
secuted” for principle (vs. 10). 


Epilogue 5: 13-16 


“Blessed” (markarios) was a word rich in meaning. 
Few, if any, in Jesus’ day would have conceded the right 
of the Master to predicate blessedness of His lowly fol- 
lowers. Writes T. R. Glover “There was something absurd 
in this little Jewish sect aspiring to conquer the world. Its 
origin was too well known. Fifty or sixty years before its 
founder had been crucified; the verb had no pathos then, 
only shame . . . The finer religious spirits were all against 
the Galileans; the artistic temperament, the pious mind, 
mysticism and imagination, found in legend and cult and 
mystery what the Jewish peasants could neither give nor 
understand.”” What Prof. Glover, with his historic sense, 
gives as an estimation of the early Christians as men saw 
them is in striking contrast with what the Master implied 
in the word “Blessed.” ‘To cause the disciples to properly 
value their position and opportunity Jesus calls them “the 
salt of the earth,” and “the light of the world.” Salt keeps 
and makes sound what would corrupt. But impure salt may 
lose its saltness . . . If you, the salt of the earth, lose your 
spiritual worth by faint-heartedness, or sloth or dark unfaith- 


142 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


fulness, your needed energy and efficiency are irreparably 
gone.” —Geikie. In Mk. 9:50 we have “Salt is good, but 
if the salt have lost its saltness, wherewith will ye season it? 
Have salt in yourselves and be at peace one with another.” 
Mark is pleading for a purged people. The offending 
“hand,” “foot’’:\or) ‘eye’ is’ to. be done: away (with 
rather than have the whole body corrupted. Jesus 
taught His disciples that they were in a position to be a 
blessing to the world. With their blessedness they might bless 
others, but if they should “lose” their “savour’—blessedness 
—wherewith could they bless the world? Failing to be a 
blessing to the world, like the salt they would be “good for 
nothing.” So as only pure; i. e., unmixed with earth—salt 
is “good” so also only separated Christians are “good.” 


Robert J. Drummond in “Faith’s Perplexities’ has a 
chapter on “How does Christianity Persist?” He reviews 
history and shows how Christianity has encountered ‘“Clas- 
sic Paganism’ at Rome; has coped with “Teutonic heathen- 
ism”; has, by accommodation at Constantinople, “degener- 
ated into a mere baptized idolatry;” has not always been 
powerful enough to resist Mohammedanism which protested 
against its worshipping of relics, pictures and saints. 

Discouraged by the encroachments of the world upon the 
spiritual life “earnest souls . . . took flight to the hermits’ 
cell or the vows of the monastery.”’ During the dark ages 
“while the only aspects of Christianity that seemed to ap- 
peal to the populace at large were the fantastic and barbaric 
expeditions of the crusades,” in “choice souls like Tauler 
and the mystics like Thomas 4 Kempis and the brothers of 
the common life, like Francis of Assisi at St. Dominic,” in 
these alone true Christianity seemed to survive. 

However black is the picture of nominal Christianity 
during the Dark Ages the Novatians, the Donatists, the 
Waldenses, the Albigenses, Jerome of Prague, Huss of 
Bohemia, Savonarola, Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Calvin, 
Knox, Latimer and Ridley and others kept the fire burning 
upon the altar. These are light-bearers, as Wesley, Whit- 
field, Carey, McCheyne, Moody and others have been in 
modern times. 

Drummond closes his chapter with an appreciation of 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 143 


“Die Stille im Lande: the quiet, godly, unobtrusive, Chris- 
tian men and women who have no talents, no gifts to sway 
the multitude, no way to make their mind or influence felt; 
but who are strong in faith and prayer and who exercise 
an influence which the world ignores while it yields to it. 
Like the praying societies in Scotland after the Revolution 
settlement, like the Pietists in Germany and Moravian 
brethren, there are always humble men and women with 
whom the Spirit finds a welcome abode, whom He moulds 


and forms and nourishes . . . We forget these patient, 
silent servants of God. Men mock at their strictness, their 
prim, simple unworldly ways . . . But the time comes when 


these despised men and women are all in all to the land. 
They are the salt of the earth and preserve it from ruin.” 

Then we have the other figure of a “light.” The world is 
dark but saints are “‘the light of the world.” But this light’ 
must be exposed. “A city set on a hill cannot be hid” but 
one in a valley is scarcely visible. No one is so foolish as 
to conceal a “‘lamp.’”’ Why have it if it is hidden? 

So in the figure of the salt Jesus urged His disciples to be 
“pure,” whereas in that of the light He urged them to be 
propagating the Gospel. Salt pleads for a sanctified church; 
light calls for a missionary church. ‘Then all the blessedness 
of Christ’s Kingdom will get out to the world through the 
disciples. 


RELATION OF CHRIST To Law (5 ; 17-20) 


When Christ had stated the “Beatitudes” which, says G. 
Campbell Morgan, “taught the Supremacy of Character, the 
sovereignty of Love,” He took pains to show His apprecia- 
tion of the “law and the prophets.” Said he, “Think not 
that I came to destroy the law of the prophets: I came not 
to destroy but to fulfil.” Says Thayer, Christ would ‘Cause 
God’s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it 
should be, and God’s promises (given through the prophets) 
to receive fulfilment.” 

Geikie recognizes that the Great Teacher of teachers, who 
penetrated to the depths of each principle formulated in 
the law, knew that “Forms are not the Law.” It is required 
in the Kingdom of God that the truth and spirit of the Law 
be observed. 


144 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


The Master made His attitude toward “the law and the 
prophets” very clear by three statements found in verses 
18, 19 and 20. Becoming very materialistic and literal that 
His hearers would be sure to understand Him, He said that 
heaven and earth would pass away (a possibility entirely 
unlikely) before ‘“‘one jot or one tittle’ would “pass away 
from the law” unfulfilled. A “jot” is “iota” in the Greek 
(the smallest letter). <A tittle is a small point on a Hebrew 
letter. Some Hebrew characters would not be distinguishable 
if it were not for the “‘tittle.”’ What Jesus said was that 
not the minutest part of the law would pass away unfulfilled. 
He upheld all the law. ‘Jewish tradition mentions this very 
letter Yod as irremovable, adding that if all men in the 
world were gathered together to abolish the least letter in 
the law, they would not succeed.” Edersheim. 

Then Jesus described the very least one in the Kingdom 
of Heaven as the one who would break one of the least 
commandments and teach men so to do, while the greatest 
. is he who does and teaches the commandments. So evi- 
' dently the “beatitudes” were not meant to supplant the 
truth and spirit of the “Decalogue.” 

Then to make the matter unmistakably clear Jesus warned 
His disciples that a righteousness exceeding that of the 
scribes and the Pharisees was necessary to entrance into the 
Kingdom of Heaven. 

Now the Pharisees had been strict enough. They filled up 
the life of the people with a weary round of offerings, cere- 
monies and purifications; and, not content with the pre- 
scriptions of Moses, had added a tedious system of 
meritorious works; fasts, washings, alms, and prayers. . . 
Jesus pierced to the heart of the truth. Stripping off all 
obsolete wrappings of rite and symbol, and repudiating all 
human additions, He proclaimed the law in its divine ideal, 
as binding for ever, in its least part, on all ages.” —Getkie. 


ContTRASTS BETWEEN RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE KINGDOM 
AND THAT OF THE Law (5:21-48) 


These contrasts are introduced by “Ye have heard” and 
“But I say unto you.” 


Jesus first deals with murder, condemned by the deca- 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 145 


logue. But He goes back of the overt act. He sees and con- 
demns anger. According to the Jewish law the murderer 
was “in danger of the judgment.” but according to Jesus, 
he that by the word “Raca” expressed contempt for his 
brother, was “in danger of the council,’ and he that said 
“Thou fool,” Moreh—an Hebrew expression of condemna- 
tion—‘‘shalt be in danger of hell fire.” The law took no 
account of “ill-will; Jesus did. He knew to what hate leads, 
as we do also when we think of duels, feuds and murders. 
Jesus would “nip in the bud” the incipent murder. 

Then in Mat. 5:23, 24 the Master teaches that if “thy 
brother hath aught against thee” it is necessary to “first be 
reconciled to thy brother” if thou wouldst “come and offer 
thy gift” acceptably. Bad ethics and good religion will not 
mix. He whose words are evil will offer an unacceptable 
worship. Motive counts for much. Unless we love our 
brother whom we have seen we cannot love God whom we 
have not been, according to John. Mat. 5:25, 26 teaches 
that it is practical as well as right to be right with our fel- 
lows. It is good policy as well as fine principle to “Agree 
with thine adversary quickly.” Before he “deliver thee to 
the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer and thou 
be cast into prison,” better settle the matter with him pri- 
vately or else the very last penny will be exacted of thee. 
Better pay your adversary what is due, or lose what he owes 
you, or forgive him, or have him to forgive you. Quarrel- 
ling is expensive. Going to law costs. The happiest as well 
as the richest man is the most agreeable man. 

“As with homicide, so, in adultery, the morality of the 
New Kingdom traced the crime home to the heart, and con- 
demned the unclean glance as a virtual commission of the 
crime itself.” —Geikie. Thus is summed up Jesus’ teaching 
as found in Mat. 5:27. To reinforce this severe ethical 
teaching Jesus stated that it were better to lose even an eye 
or the “right hand” than to be “cast into hell.’”’ How con- 
crete this is! There is no mistaking His meaning. It is a 
case of gratifying an illict desire and suffering the penalty of 
a lost “body” or of saying “no!” to that forbidden lust. 

In an age when “Pharisaic laws of divorce were shame- 
fully loose,” when the Rabbis said “If any one see a 

10 


146 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


woman handsomer than his wife, he may dismiss his wife 
and marry that woman,” Jesus went a step in advance of 
even the Mosaic provision for divorce (which was a protec- 
tion for the woman) by saying “But I say unto you, that 
every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of 
fornication, maketh her an adulteress,” etc. So the New 
Kingdom requirements in purity are the highest. Accord- 
ing to its standards a man is guilty of adultery when he 
casts a lustful look; he is guilty of sending another into 
adultery when he divorces his chaste wife, who when 
divorced would probably marry again and so become guilty 
of adultery unless there had been valid grounds for divorce. 
Jesus here challenges us to yield only to the holiest impulses 
and to do all in our power to save another soul from sin. 

In Mat. 5:33-37 the Great Teacher, Jesus,—He with 
respect to whose ethics E. Y. Mullins in “Why is Chris- 
tianity True” says, “It is conceded that the ethics of Jesus 
are the highest yet given to the world,’—discourages the 
giving of oaths. His prohibition is clear—“Swear not at 
all.”” His recommendation is simply—‘‘But let your speech 
be Yea, yea; Nay, nay.” His estimate of other practices 
was a condemnation. Said He, “Whatsoever is more than 
these is of the evil.” 


Geikie explains that the Mosaic law had simply forbidden _. 
false swearing (Lev. 19:12), but that “the casuistry of the 
Rabbis had so darkened the whole subject of oaths that they 
had, in effect, became utterly worthless.” Men swore by 
heaven, earth, the sun, the prophets, the temple, Jerusalem, 
the altar, wood used on the altar, sacrifices, temple vessels 
and even by their own heads. Then the scribes had added a 
paraphrase of Deut. 23: 21 to Lev. 19: 12 and so said “Thou 
shalt not swear falsely but shalt perform unto the Lord 
thine oaths.’ ‘Thus they accepted what seemed to them a 
loop-hole through which they could pass and avoid the keep- 
ing of their oaths. For they contended that no oath was 
binding unless it had a vow of sacrifice with it. Then if 
that vow was fulfilled the oath was not binding. So decep- 
tions and even perjury was sanctioned if it were “purified 
by an offering.” Herein the Jewish teachers were super- 
ficial in their religion but perfectly satisfying to the “gar- 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 147 


rulous, exaggerating, crafty Jew” who should have been 
checked rather than encouraged in his prevarications. Fear 
prevented them from swearing “by God” yet when they 
swore by anything of His work or worship they really swore 
by Him. Then how futile it was to swear by their heads, 
concerning which they had not power to change so much as 
the color of “one hair.’ Jesus’ disciples needed no oaths. 
Conduct which is the expression of character gives sufficient 
weight to one’s words. I have noticed how meaningless are 
oaths as apologetically given by a Justice of the Peace toa 
Clergyman in whom the Justice had absolute confidence. 
They are in such a case superlative addenda, if not positive 
imipedimenta, and so are either hurried over in a nondescript 
fashion or totally taken for granted. 

Papini says “He who swears to the truth is afraid, he 
who swears to the false is a traitor. The first believes that 
the power invoked could punish him, the other is an impos- 
tor who profits by the faith of others the more readily to 
deceive them.” 

We may be thankful that our law will permit the simple- 
hearted Christian to “affirm.” Such a person will never 
promise above his power to perform because he knows that 
by his words he is justified or condemned. 

Mat. 5: 38-42 deals with Nonresistance. Where can we 
today find a nation, a community or even a church that 
consistently carries out the principle laid down here? A 
certain branch of Mennonites is called ““Nonresisters.”” Un- 
less they belie their name they incarnate the acme of Chris- 
tian teaching. Probably it is expecting too much to look 
for a society of people so far beyond anything Moses 
required. For the law demanded Justice. ‘The punishment 
was intended to match the offense—not too much nor too 
meager, but “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” 
‘In times when a head was asked for an eye, an arm for 
a finger and a hundred lives for a life, a law of retaliation 
which asked only for an eye for an eye and a life for a life 
was a notable victory in generosity, appalling though it 
seems after the teaching of Jesus.” —Papini. And the teach- 
ing of Jesus seems ‘appalling’ to us who have been 
accustomed to man-made standards, 


148 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Luke 6: 27-36 includes more general, far-reaching utter- 
ances than Mat. 5: 38-42, which it seems to parallel. “Love 
your enemies,” “and as ye would that men should do to you, 
do ye also to them likewise,” and ‘Be ye merciful, even as 
your Father is merciful’ are such sweeping utterances that 
their very challenge has impressed them upon us. What 
Jesus is here demanding is that the citizens of His Kingdom 
be Christlike. 

Papini has taken great pains to show how it is practical 
to “Offer also the other,” ‘Io him that smiteth thee on the 
one cheek.” I never saw it literally carried out but believe 
it would work if some one would only demonstrate it to us. 
Of course we fancy that we often “turn . . . the other 
also” figuratively speaking. Perhaps some do sometimes. 
But the great Italian biographer clearly outlines and evi- 
dently believes that Jesus here is presenting a workable 
theory. So dolI. It seems to me, however, that it is best 
to apply this principle of nonresistance as individuals and 
not expect nations and smaller groups to apply it, else we 
will meet many a stumbling-block. But to go back to 
Papini’s contention. He says there are three possibilities 
when one is smitten on the cheek. These are fight, flight and 
offering the other cheek. lf you fight back or run away 
you act as an animal, a savage, a natural man would do. 
When you give blow for blow the situation grows from 
bad to worse. Either or both may be killed. The latter 
occurred recently in Kentucky when two brothers 17 and 32 
met on a quiet roadway and shot each other to death; the 
former, in the early history of our republic when Aaron 
Burr, who once lacked but a single vote of becoming Presi- 
dent of the United States, and Alexander Hamilton, “who 
smote the rock of national resources and abundant streams 
of revenue burst forth and touched the dead corpse of public 
credit and it sprang upon its feet’—-when these two noted 
Americans at Weehawken, N. J. fought a duel with pistols 
and Hamilton fell mortally wounded. So much for fighting 
back. 

Then there is the possibility of flight. Only a coward 
would “turn tail and run.’’ And to do so would only pro- 
voke the one attacking to pursue and probably continue the 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 149 


punishment. By quitting the scene one admits that he is 
in the wrong and encourages an attack for which he becomes 
partly responsible. A laughable incident related by an old 
time senior friend of the writer seems in place here. In 
the days of a generation or two ago when youths and even 
bearded men attended rural schools, and that not always in 
quest of knowledge, in those what our forbears are prone to 
call “good old days” of “long, cold winters,” of deep snow, 
of strong men and other wonders of the glorious, distance- 
enchanted past, then on a certain day in a common country- 
school house a bearded youth and a brave teacher differed 
in opinion on some fine point of conduct and honor. Words 
seemed weapons all too feeble and the brawny pedagogue, 
probably fearing the charge of effeminacy, attacked his 
protegee who, realizing that the law was all against him 
“took to his heels.” So they too ran like a fox and a hound 
until the rapidly progressing pupil, suddenly thinking of his 
reputation as a “boxer,’’ turned and, fierce as a lion, taced 
his pursuer who, unable to endure his countenance, in his 
turn faced about and at each bound lessened the distance 
between himself and the friendly schoolhouse, his “city 
of refuge,” his “castle.” Thus was demonstrated the folly 
and futility of flight. 

But if we cannot most successfully meet an attack with 
our fists in a fight or our feet in flight we will be safe to 
carry out the directions of Jesus’ and face our foe with “the 
other cheek.”’ This procedure should impress the one that 
has struck the trying blow with the fact of our control on 
the one hand or our courage on the other. “Quietness, when 
it is not stupidity, gentleness when it is not cowardice, 
astound common souls as do all marvelous things. They 
make the very brute understand that this man is more than 
a man.”—Papimt. Who can imagine anything more unnatu- 
ral than for one to turn the other cheek when struck by an 
irate foe? But citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven are 
expected to exceed worldlings. 

Then the Master Teacher, perhaps fearful that His pupils 
would not learn the lesson of Nonresistance from one 
figure, adds three others. We are given pause when we 
contemplate how contrary to custom it is to give a cloak 


150 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


to one who has taken away our coat, to go “the second 
mile” with one who has compelled the going of one, to 
“Give to him that asketh thee.” All this calls for a mag- 
nanimity altogether too uncommon. Rey. Charles Thur- 
good, Pastor of the Central Christian Church of Pittsburgh, 
Pa., for 18 years, commonly known as “‘Brother Thurgood,” 
came the nearest embodying this great Christian principle 
of nonresistance that I have ever known. He would 
give his last nickel, his street-car fare to any “tramp” who 
might ask him for it and then walk home, however far it 
might be. He would freely forgive or in fact never charge 
any one guilty of heaping abuse upon him. Of him an old 
Irish brother said with tears in his eyes, “If Brother Thur- 
good ever failed, he failed on the goodness side.”’ 

Christ calls for modern “Great Hearts.” It is said that 
“Stanton called Lincoln ‘a low, cunning clown,’ nicknamed 
him the ‘original gorilla,’ said that Du Chaillu was a fool to 
wander all the way to Africa in search of what he could 
easily have found at Springfield, Illinois. Then Lincoln, 
who knew well what Stanton had said, made Stanton Secre- 
tary of War, because he was-the best man for the place.” 
When Lincoln lay in state Stanton said “There lies the 
greatest ruler of men the world has ever seen.’”’ Lincoln’s 
magnanimity had mastered Stanton. Christ’s prayer for 
those that had crucified Him and Stephen’s “Lay not this 
sin to their charge” reflect the secret of Nonresistance. It 
is possible by positive goodness. No negative, spineless 
supineness will do. It is not enough to stand still when 
struck. “Turn to him the other” cheek. Show the greedy 
man that he is mistaken in his supposing that things satisfy 
by actually giving him more than asked. Exceed the 
demands of the bully or ruffian. Unman the sinner by 
Christ’s method. 


Matthew 5: 43-48 deals with Love to Enemies. When 
Jesus said “Ye have heard that it was said ‘Thou shalt love 
thy neighbor and hate thy enemy,’ ”’ He was speaking as one 
conversant not only with Jewish Rabbinic teaching, but also 
as one familiar with other ethical teachings. Leviticus 19: 


7 
7 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 151 


18 advises “Love thy neighbor as thyself” but the Jews did 
not count all men as their neighbors, so they “‘hated” the 
Samaritans and the Gentiles and in this they evidently had 
Old Testament warrant as Deut. 23: 3-6 indicates. They 
were vindictive. 

Gleaning from those that have scanned history’s page I 
note the following facts which reveal to us just how new 
and revolutionary was Jesus’ teaching, “Love your enemies, 
pray for them that persecute you.” Even Israel’s Sweet 
Singer, as the Imprecatory Psalms show, prayed the ven- 
geance of God on his enemies. (See Psalms 7:35; 69 
and 109.) We attempt oftentimes to soften down these 
anathemas of David by saying they are predictive rather 
than volitive (yet my opinion is that they are imprecations 
indicating David’s attitude toward his enemies, for though 
he would not lift up his hand against Saul, “the Lord’s 
anointed,”’ yet he was noted as a man of war. For this very 
reason Solomon and not he built the temple). Then we 
excuse David by saying that his was a “Stern Age’; that 
he desired not personal revenge but the honor of God and 
the church; that the Old Testament saints did not clearly 
see the teaching of judgment to come and so they wanted to 
and felt constrained to “straighten out” matters here and 
now. 

But Jesus’ desire is that His disciples “may be sons of 
their Father which is in heaven.” “For,” said He, “he 
maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good and sendeth 
rain on the just and unjust.” So the command to “love 
your enemies” is a challenge to be, even while on earth, 
worthy sons of our Heavenly Father, who is noted for His 
altruism. Herein is the key to the situation, the revelation 
of the secret. Jesus is giving a new revelation of God and 
a new conception of Brotherhood. Disciples of Christ are 
to surpass the publicans in loving, for even they reciprocate 
in love (5:46); even Gentiles “salute” their “brethren” 
but we are to extend the circle of our love and be generous 
in our salutations. Neither geography nor genealogy should 
close up the springs of our affections and courtesies. How 
is all this unlike Rome’s unfriendly early attitude toward a 
stranger, or Mommsen’s figure, “a tribe must be either the 


152 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 
anvil or the hammer,” or how different Jesus’ teaching is 
from that of Confucius who advocated filial love and gen- 
eral benevolence, but who never thought of condemning 
hate, or from Buddha’s “cold, egotistical, self-seeking love,” 
or from the Rabbis’ negative ‘‘Do not do,” or from Socrates’ 
Justice,’ or Aristotle’s “Not to resent offenses is the mark 
of a base slavish man.” 


So Jesus is here portraying a new type of humanity. 
Christians are to be so different, yea, so superior to ordinary 
folks. This no one will deny. As soon as one professes to 
be a follower of “the meek and lowly Jesus” at once is he 
expected to be above reproach ethically; and not only that 
but also to be magnanimous, forgiving, loving and kind. 
This expectation is at once a compliment to the religion of 
Jesus Christ and a challenge to our consecration, as well as 
an opportunity for us to draw upon divine power. But 
what men demand of us our Master in Mat. 5:48 requires 
and, if I mistake not, predicts. For the Revised Version 
translates our passage, “Ye therefore shall be perfect as 
your Heavenly Father is perfect.’”’ Now the predictive fu- 
ture naturally glides into a volitive future which amounts 
to an imperative. But it seems that the R. V. is right in 
translating, “Ye shall be perfect,” rather than “Be ye per- 
fect’’ for we must not regard this as a “severe ethic,” as 
a thunderbolt command coming from the throne of an 
autocrat but rather let us think of Mat. 5:48 as a beautiful 
statement of character of Christ’s real disciples. All that 
is in “perfect” is predicated of those that love their enemies 
and pray for those that persecute them. 'The Ancients used 
this word “perfect” (teleioi) when they referred to the 
initiates into the mystery religions. ‘These had learned the 
secrets of the particular religion into which they had been 
initiated. Its teachings were no longer mystery to them: 
Likewise here we have a picture of Jesus’ disciples going 
into the very heart of divine knowledge and practice. ‘The 
Father “loves” all, even those inimical to Him (Jno. 3: 16). 
If ye recognize'God as Father (not a despot, nor a tribal 
god) then “Love” as does He “that ye may be sons of your 
Father which is in heaven.” Getting into His teaching, 
catching His spirit ye become “perfect as your heavenly 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 153 


Father is perfect.” Nothing is here intimated about sin- 
lessness. We do not raise that question. The sermon on 
the Mount is above and beyond the Decalogue. ‘The “Thou 
shalt not’’ gives way to “Blessed are ye.”’ If the Decalogue 
is the base, then the Sermon on the Mount is the summit or 
peak. The traveller who has with difficulty scaled the moun- 
tain of legalism, having come out of the valley of paganism 
with its miasmatic fogs, who has climbed up through sacri- 
fices, offerings, ritual and liturgy, now at the top of the 
mountain inhales the pure air of grace as he, with prophetic 
vision, beholds the glory of the “Sun of Righteousness.” 
The rare atmosphere of heaven stimulates him to do spir- 
itual exploits. He so far surpasses anything that man has 
seen or thought that he may well be called “perfect.” He 
is god-like. For him to live is Christ. Shall we reserve 
this high life for “the Kingdom Age’? By no means. 


Matrurtw 6—RICGHTEOUSNESS AND REWARD 


Verse one generalizes. It warns us that if we do our 
acts of religion (righteousness) before men in order that 
we be seen of them we will receive no reward from God, 
our heavenly Father. 

The rest of the chapter specifies and instructs us first 
how to (a) give alms (2-4), (b) pray (5-15), and (c) 
fast (16-18); and secondly some of the underlying ideas 
with respect to these religious manifestations are discussed 
(19-34). Almsgiving is to be done quietly, yea, secretly. 
Only “hypocrites”? make an ado about it. They do this for 
the reward which they prize, which is men’s praise. But 
when men do not see God sees and rewards. 

Prayer is to be offered in one’s “inner chamber.” Cer- 
tainly it then will be to God and not like that “most eloquent 
prayer ever delivered to a Boston audience.’ If one’s 
prayers are made to God they need not be paraded; if they 
are offered for their effect upon men they will be public and, 
of course, empty, “‘vain repetitions.” I think the one who 
prays is fooled in such a practice rather than his audience, 
yet he has “his reward” in thinking that men hear and 
admire his religion. Prayers should be simple because we 
need not explain our needs to Him in détail. He knows 


154 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


(6:8). Only extend the hand of faith. He will fill it. 

In contrast with the ‘‘vain repetitions’ of Gentile pray- 
ing, the Master suggested a simple form of prayer, includ- 
ing: 

(1) Recognition of and reverence for God as Father 


(2) Request for the kingdom on earth (6:10). 

(3) Recognition of and request to God as source of 
food (6:11). 

(4) Petition to be forgiven (6:12). 

(5) Prayer to be kept from temptation (6:13). 


Then to show that the spirit behind the prayer is impor- 
tant Jesus specifically said, “For if ye forgive men their 
trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But 
if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your 
Father forgive your trespasses” (6:14, 15). So the char- 
acter and practice of the one who prays is more important 
than the form of the prayer. As James, our Lord’s brother, 
says: ‘The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man 
availeth much.” 

Fasting is to be done in such a way as not to be seen to 
men as fasting. When the person who fasts is of a “sad 
countenance,” when he “disfigures his face’ he is “as the 

ypocrites.” With anointed head and glad, washed face 
we should fast. Men need not know of our fastings. God 
will know. ‘That is sufficient. Let ours be His recompense 
and not the reward of men. 

So in fasting as in almsgiving and praying we are to do 
it with a God-consciousness. If our Father sees, we have 
gained our point. Harnack has said that “Religion is living 
in time for eternity under the eye and with the help of God.” 
In no part of the Bible is there greater stress laid on the 
fact that God, our heavenly Father, sees, appreciates and 
will reward, than in Matthew 6. The refrain is “thy Father 
who seeth in secret shall recompense thee” (verses 4, 6, 18). 

The “Underlying Ideas” referred to above are worthy of 
brief note. Almsgiving naturally follows a belief that 
heaven’s bank is the only safe repository for a saint’s re- 
sources. ‘Those who give alms instead of hoarding their 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 155 


money fear neither moth nor rust nor thieves. They are 
heavenly minded “for where thy treasure is, there will thy 
heart be also” (6:19-21). Prayer presupposes a recog- 
nition of God as Lord and an eye “single” to His glory. He 
that serves mammon while he professes to serve God only 
wastes time spent in prayer (6: 22-24). Fasting is done by 
those that believe that “the life is more than food and the 
body than the raiment.” And all three of the spiritual 
exercises here considered are carried on with the same 
abandon as is witnessed in the birds that are fed by “your 
heavenly Father,” in the lilies that are arrayed more gor- 
geously than was Solomon, in the grass clothed by God. 


So it behooves us to “Seek . . . first his kingdom and his 
righteousness” and then we can rest assured that “all these 
things shall be added unto” us. Let not providing against 
tomorrow's evils hinder our spiritual service today (6: 25- 
34). 

Matthew 7 may be interpreted as Edersheim so thought- 
fully suggests: “First, the Kingdom of God cannot be 
circumscribed as you would do it (7:1-5). Secondly, it 
cannot be extended, as you would do it, by external means 
(7:6), but cometh to us from God (7:7-12), and is en- 
tered by personal determination and separation (7: 13, 14). 
Thirdly, it is not preached as too often is attempted when 
thoughts of it are merely of the external (7:15, 16). 
Lastly, it is not manifested in life in the manner too common 
among religionists, but is very real and true and good in 
its effects (7: 17-20). And this Kingdom received by us 
is like a solid house on a solid foundation, which nothing 
from without can shake or destroy” (7: 24-27). 


§ 50. The Centurion’s Servant. Mat. 8:5-13; Luke 
7: 1-10. 


Having finished His Sermon, Jesus again enters Caper- 
naum, “‘that little fishing town” in and around which so 
much connected with the life and ministry of Jesus gathers. 
“And thou, Capernaum, which are exalted to heaven, shalt 
be thrust down to hell” (Lu. 10:15). Like Chorazin and 
Bethsaida her privileges were great. 


156 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Prominent Features of Incident: 


1. The Centurion was a Gentile. “He was captain of the 
troop quartered in Capernaum, and in the service of Herod 
Antipas.”—Edersheim. Strange it seems that this military 
man should have had such faith in Jesus. His addressing 
Him as “Lord” (Kurie) indicates that he held Him in 
reverential esteem. 

2. The Condition of the boy, “servant,’’ was desperate. 
He was “‘bed-fast,” “terribly tortured.” What the “Ruler 
of a hundred” literally said was, “My boy has been thrown 
(upon a bed) in the house, a paralytic, grievously tortured.” 
So a Gentile comes to the Master to present a dire need. 

3. The Condescension of Jesus is noteworthy. Said He, 
“When I have come, I will heal him” (Mat. 8:7). He did 
not discriminate against the Gentile. He did not even wait 
to be asked to heal the “servant.” The need presented was 
the prayer. Yet Luke, who wrote to the Gentiles (Greeks) 
says that “he sent unto him elders of the Jews, asking him 
that he would come and save his servant” (7:3). “Jews” 
should observe that Christ responded to a Gentile’s need; 
“Gentiles” should be willing to go even through Jews to 
get to Jesus. 

4. The Confession of the Centurion is deserving of our 
attention. He plead his “unfitness” (Mat. 8:8; Lu. 7:6). 
This was not a confession of low character, but a courteous 
regard for the Jewish aloofness from the Gentiles. ‘The 
houses of Gentiles were considered as defiled and as defiling 
those who entered them.”—Edersheim. 

In a real sense we should feel “unworthy” to have Jesus 
come to us. But he, though of a Jewish mother, is “Son of 
Man.” He broke down the middle wall of partition between 
Jew and Gentile. 

5. The Confidence of the Centurion, rather than the 
cavilling of the Pharisaical party, arrests our attention (Mat. 
8:9, 10; Lu. 7:7, 8). Said he, “Only speak by means of 
word.” He had so much faith in Jesus’ “word” that he did 
not feel that Jesus needed to go in person. “His homage 
had been like the wave-offering before God, of the first 
sheaf of the Gentile world.”—Getkie. Since a prayer would 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 157 


do why have the person of Christ at the bedside of the 
paralytic? So a practical Gentile grasped Jesus’ method. 


Christianity is of universal application. It did not require 
a knowledge of Jewish traditions to appropriate Christ. The 
soldier reached out the hand of faith and took blessing from 
Jesus; the scholastic would have quibbled over the philoso- 
phy of healing and prayer. 

6. Community of Faith rather than descent (Mat. 8:11). 
“It was a common belief that in the day of the Messiah 
redeemed Israel would be gathered to a great feast, to- 
gether with the patriarchs and heroes of the Jewish faith.” 
—Edersheim. 


Jesus does not exclude the Jew from this feast, but on 
the other hand includes him as the names of “Abraham, 
Isaac and Jacob” indicate. But with these “Israelites in- 
deed” “many from the rising of the sun and the setting of the 
sun” shall come and recline at the feast in the kingdom of 
heaven. Verily all that are of faith are children of Abra- 
ham. 


7. Calamity of unbelievers. To show that unbelief ex- 
cludes, Jesus again resorted to Jewish language. “Gehinnom 
—of which the entrance marked by ever-ascending smoke, 
was in the valley of Hinnom, between two palm trees—lay 
‘beyond the mountain of darkness.’ It was a place of dark- 
ness, to which in the day of the Lord, the Gentiles would be 
consigned. On the other hand, the merit of circumcision 
would in the day of the Messiah deliver Jewish sinners from 
Gehinnom.”—Edersheim. Probably “outer darkness” stood 
for “a place of hopeless, endless night.” ‘The weeping and 
gnashing of teeth” indicated sorrow and anger in Rabbinic 
thought. Ah! the Jewish leaders had a “hell’’ for Gentiles 
into which they were about to drop. Faith in Christ is the 
touchstone. A gentile Centurion’s faith is the key which 
unlocks the power and promises of God through Christ ‘‘and 
the servant was healed in that hour” is the 


8. Concluding statement in a narrative of mighty faith 
and miracle. 


158 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 51. The Raising of the Widow’s Son at Nain. 
Luke 7: 11-17. 


Possibly the day following the healing of the centurion’s 
servant (‘‘soon afterwards” v. 11 is:given on the next day by 
many ancient authorities) Jesus, with His disciples, went to 
Nain, “a village twenty-five miles to the southwest” of 
Capernaum. “A great multitude (v. 11) followed Him, for 
He was in the time of popularity as to His ministry. As 
He approached the city He met a funeral procession. The 
Lord of Life came into the presence of death. Two features 
of this funeral were especially adapted to make an appeal 
to Him who said, “I am the Life”: (a) the “dead was the 
only son of his mother’ and (b) “she was a widow.” So 
we do not wonder that He that was the “only begotten son” 
(Jno. 1:14, 18) of the heavenly Father, whose mother 
evidently was a widow “had compassion on her and said 
unto her, Weep not.” 


Jewish custom, as well as the especially deep grief of this 
childless widow, had brought out ‘‘much people of the city” 
(v. 12) yet they were powerless in the presence of death. 
But not so with our Lord. His familiarity with the customs 
and belief of the Jews enabled Him to see the importance 
of using His power then and there. Not only did Jesus 
appreciate the struggle that had been made to spare the life 
and the “terrible burst of sorrow” upon the death of the 
“only son” but He knew the Jewish ideas about death and 
that which follows the same; “knowledge just sufficient to 
make even the most pious Rabbi uncertain of his future.” 
Jesus knew how hard it is to be submissive when God’s 
love is not evident and how at such times the heart may 
rebel. Sitting on the floor, abstaining from meat and wine, 
providing two flutes and one mourning woman, having .a 
funeral oration at the grave, “But in all this painful pag- 
eantry there was nothing for the heart of the widow, bereft 
of her only child.”—Edersheim. 


And when we consider the presence of the multittide we 
are led to wonder whether they were present more to sym- 
pathize with the bereaved than to pay their mute respects 
to death so mysterious and with such tenacious grip. But 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 159 


when the “Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief” bade 
the widow to “weep not,” He meant to tell her that soon the 
occasion of weeping would be no more. For “He came 
nigh and touched the bier. He dreaded not the greatest of 
all defilements—that of contact with the dead, which Rab- 
binism, in its elaboration of the letter of the law, had sur- 
rounded with endless terrors.”—Edersheim. Then He spake 
with authority words suited to the need—a command brief 
but authoritative—“ Young man, to thee I say, Arise.” But 
four words in the original Greek carry this mighty mes- 
sage, this dynamic deliverance. Jesus addressed His order 
not to a corpse but to a “young man,’ Neaniske. When 
John said, “I have written unto you, young men, because ye 
are strong (1 John 2:14), he used this same term. Then 
said He, “to thee I say,” soz lego, to put meaning into, rather 
than Jaleo, to simply utter. ‘Arise,’ egerthett, carried the 
command. It conveyed an urgency. There was no lying 
there a pale corpse when He who has the keys of life and 
death had given such a behest. So ‘The dead sat up and 
began to speak. And he gave him to his mother.” Death 
had cruelly snatched him from his loving mother; Jesus 
robbed death of its victim and presented the living son to 
the jubilant mother. 

Then those present realized that in their very midst was 
a “great prophet.”’ ‘Fear seized all and they glorified God 
saying . . . God has visited His people” (v. 16). On this 
Geikie writes, “It was at Shunem . . . a village on the 
other side of the very hill on which Nain stood, that Elisha 
had raised the only son of the lady who had hospitably en- 
tertained him; the luxuriant plain of Jezreel, stretching out 
beneath, had been the scene of the greatest events in the 
life of Elijah, who had raised to life the son of the widow 
in the Phenician village of Sarepta, on the far northern 
coast. No prouder sign of their greatness as prophets had 
lingered in the mind than such triumphs over the grave. . . 
“At sight of the young man once more alive, the memory 
of Elijah and Elisha was on every lip.” 

This evident miracle, together with that of the healing of 
the centurion’s servant, was reported even far to the south 
in Judea and surely even to “remote Perea,” 


160 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 52. John the Baptist’s Last Message. Mat. 11: 2- 
30; Luke 7: 18-35. 


While Jesus was doing His mighty works and thereby 
causing the circulation of the report of the same in “all the 
region round about,” John the Baptist, His sacrificial fore- 
runner, was languishing in the dungeon of Machaerus. 
Though young in years yet he was in hourly expectation of 
death. 


While Herod Antipas protected him from Herodias, yet 
he did not give him his freedom, but permitted John to re- 
ceive visits from his disciples who told him of Jesus’ works. 
John had baptized Jesus; had seen the Spirit descend like a 
dove upon Him; had heard from heaven in regard to Him, 
yet, as Geikie notes, “As a Jew he had clung to Jewish ideas 
of the Messiah, expecting, apparently, a national movement 
which would establish a pure theocracy under Jesus.” 


But Jesus had not carried on affairs as a Hero-King might 
be expected to do. He had not behaved like a Messianic- 
Monarch should. Why had he left John in prison? Doubt- 
less John had time for such questionings. The gloomy 
prison would go far towards darkening his own soul. “A 
child of the desert, accustomed to its wild freedom, he was 
now caged in a dismal fortress, with no outlook except black 
lava-crags, and deep gorges, yawning in seemingly bottom- 
less depths.”—Geikie. Though John, fired with prophetic 
enthusiasm in his heydey, said, ‘““He must increase but I 
must decrease,” yet when deserted by the fickle people and 
not even visited by Jesus, he naturally experienced a sad 
reaction. He missed the boundless freedom of the desert, 
the enthusiasm of the multitudes that had hung on his 
words. So John, the cousin of Jesus, the forerunner of the 
Messiah, the preacher, the character of strength, yet mod- 
esty, who was taken for the Messiah, yet who professed to 
be but “a voice’”—this “man sent from God whose name 
was John” asked Jesus, “Art thou he that cometh or look 
we for another ?” 


Consider Jesus’ answer to this frank question. As usual 
Christ was attracting earth’s needy to His beneficent minis- 
try. So as Luke 7:21 records: “In that hour he cured 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 161 


many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits; and on many 
that were blind he bestowed sight.” John’s disciples wit- 
nessed these works. ‘Then Jesus bade them to go and tell 
John just what they had seen (Mat. 11:4, 5; Luke 7:22). 
Here again Jesus let His works speak. Probably this form 
of answer would serve John better than mere words. He 
who was giving sight to the blind would not leave in mental 
darkness him upon whom “alone our Lord pronounced a 
panegyric.”—Wilson. He preached “good tidings” to the 
poor. He must have delivered something that would serve 
as an answer to John whose poverty was evident. 

With this report of wonderful works the Master sent to 
that inhospitable prison a “Beatitude’’—“‘Blessed is he, who- 
soever shall find no occasion of stumbling in me.’ Ah! 
Jesus knew what was troubling John. He was aware of 
His being a disappointment to John, for whom He had only 
eulogy. He was careful not to upbraid His forerunner. He 
did not disregard John’s doubts nor reprove his inquisitive- 
ness. 


“There lies more faith in honest doubt, 
Believe me, than in half the creeds.” 


So Christ beatifies him that does not stumble over what 
He essentially was and is. Jesus certainly knew that the 
religious “Builders” of His day were rejecting Him; that 
He was a “stone of stumbling and a rock of offense” (1 
Pet. 2:7, 8), and He also knew what meaneth the Scripture 
“Behold I lay in Sion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious; 
and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded” (1 
Pet. 2:6). John’s doubts were but an echo of his age. As 
he saw it, Jesus promised much at times but He seemed to 
be heading in the direction of defeat. Mayhap John had 
premonitions of the executioner’s ax for himself, and saw 
the cross looming up on the horizon for Christ. And since 
John was not in the Kingdom he likely shared what Paul 
states of the Jews and Greeks with respect to the cross: “We 
preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block, 
and unto the Greeks foolishness” (1 Cor. 1:23). How 
could John be expected to understand the necessity of 
Christ’s victory through defeat, His life through death, His 
ea yarete through humiliation, since we know that not one 

1 


162 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


of the disciples, who were with Him through His ministry, 
was prepared for His crucifixion. The story is well known. 
Christ went to Calvary alone! No one on earth could 
“watch with Him.” His death left His disciples disconsolate 
and hopeless. (Read Luke 24.) We trust John passed 
through his period of darkness and so realized the “‘blessed- 
ness’ predicted of all who are not confounded at Christ’s 
death, which is the touchstone of each individual life. 

Having sent the two messengers back to cheer the hap- 
less occupant of the prison Jesus commended John in a fit- 
ting eulogy (Mat. 11:7-15; Lu. 7:24-28). Surrounded 
by the very multitudes that had thronged John when he 
preached, aware that these people knew of John’s present 
plight and test of faith, Jesus in “tender, lofty and fervent” 
words gave His encomium of John. John was no weakling, 
so spineless that like a reed, he could be “tossed about with 
every wind . . . of doctrine.” Human opinions mattered 
nothing to John the Baptist. He was God-taught in the 
solitude of the desert as was Moses in Midian and Paul in 
Arabia. ; 

“As some tall cliff, that lifts its awful form,” as a Gi- 
braltar, John stood dauntless, impregnable. 


John was no Epicurean. He lived not to eat dainties and 
wear “soft raiment.” Such men were in “kings’ houses” 
not in a prison dungeon for preaching against a monarch’s 
sin. John was no ease-loving courtier. He had the heart 
of a Nathan, and the words of a Chrysostom, each of whom 
dared to fearlessly denounce the sins of royalty. 


John was “more than a prophet.” Did not the prophets 
“search what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ 
which was in them did signify”? (1 Pet.1:11). But John 
saw his prophecy realized. ‘Then he excelled other prophets 
in being the forerunner of the Messiah. 


Yea, there is no greater than John. Yet ina certain sense 
“he that is but little in the kingdom of heaven is greater 
than he.” For surely those that really get into the “King- 
dom of heaven” are not beset by doubts as to who Christ 
is. The Church is built upon the confession first made by 
Peter according to the revelation from the Father in heaven. 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 163 


We all rest on this “rock.” Singularly enough it was the 
forceful Peter who bared “this rock.” 

By ‘He that is less in the kingdom of heaven is greater 
than he,” Henry understands “‘the apostles and ministers of 
the New Testament, the evangelical prophets.” The com- 
parison is to office rather than sanctity. “John preached 
Christ coming; they preached Him crucified and glorified.” 

Jesus here suggests much about force or “violence” (Mat. 
11:12; cf. Luke 16:16). “From the days of John the 
Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suftereth violence,” 
etc. This is not to the disparagement of John. Jesus is 
praising John who “started something.” “For all the proph- 
ets and the law prophesied until John.” They simply proph- 
esied. John began the fulfillment of those prophecies. He 
was God’s instrument to bring things to pass. ‘Things 
happened” when John came on the scene. He was energetic, 
rather iconoclastic. ‘And if ye are willing to receive him, 
this is Elijah, which is to come.” He had the spirit of that 
energetic prophet of old who moved quickly and effectively 
and usually boldly. 

Then it is clear that since ““Biazetai” is middle or passive, 
we may translate “From the days of John the Baptist until 
now the Kingdom of heaven presses violently,” etc. How 
true this was. John, the Champion of the kingdom, brought 
it to men’s attention, as Peter the Hermit preached the cru- 
sades to a superstitious church in his day. 

But, as usual, only ‘He that hath ears to hear” is able to 
hear. 

Then follows in Mat. 11: 16-19, Jesus’ Condemnation of 
His generation. First, He condemned His generation for 
not appreciating the great and grave realities of the time. 
As if hard pressed for a suitable simile Jesus asked, “But 
whereunto shall I liken this generation?” Then He lights 
upon the figure of “children playing in the market places.” 
Those about Jesus trifled with the valuable, the unspeakably 
precious, as tiny children “in the empty market places, play- 
ing at marriages and mournings, some making music on the 
flute for the one; some acting like mourners for the other; 
but neither the cheerful piping, nor the sad beating of the 
breast, pleasing the companion audience.”—Geikie. Then 


164 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


again Christ’s generation was like the children here de- 
scribed in that they were not satisfied. John was very care- 
ful to uphold the customs of the Rabbis; so he fasted. Yet 
they said, “He hath a devil.” Jesus mingled among men, 
even eating with them. Him they accused of gluttony and 
of being “a friend of publicans and sinners.” “And wis- 
dom is justified by her works.” Christ challenged His gen- 
eration to view the deeds of both John and Himself if they 
would pass upon their merits. He trusted His works to 
vindicate Him in the eyes of those whose ears did not catch 
His words. 

Then as samples of a trifling, dissatisfied generation He 
referred to cities which had had opportunities to see and 
know, yet had rejected Him. Tyre and Sidon, long since 
destroyed, were not so hard-hearted as Chorazin and Beth- 
saida of Jesus’ day. Sodom, a memory of evil deeds, would 
have stood had it only enjoyed the privileges of Capernaum. 
Yet on Chorazin and Bethsaida Jesus pronounced a “Woe” 
and of Capernaum He predicted “Thou shalt go down to 
Hades.” 

“At that season’”’ Jesus showed His preference for the 
humble (Mat. 11:25-27). As in Paul’s day ‘the wisdom 
of this world” was “foolishness with” Christ. Humble, re> 
sponsive, child-like faith received what the religious leaders — 
rejected. “The common people heard him gladly, but their 
teachers opposed Him, and He did not will to reveal the 
Father to these ‘“‘schoolmen” but rather to the ‘‘obedient 
children.” So also, to encourage them He invites them to 
share His yoke. He also serves under a yoke. Yet His 
“yoke is easy.” He promises soul rest. 


§ 53. Anointing of Jesus in the House of Simon, the 
Pharisee. Luke 7: 36-50. 


1. Why did Jesus eat with a Pharisee? 

Since Jesus was a recognized, if not indeed a popular, 
Teacher, it was fitting from the standpoint of etiquette that 
Simon, the Pharisee, should entertain Him in his home. 
Then the antagonism which later became so acute between 
Christ and the Pharisees was just in its inception at this 
time of Jesus’ Galilean ministry. Jesus had begun to affirm 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 165 


great truths; He had announced principles that were run- 
ning counter to the teaching of the Pharisees; but “the op- 
position to Him was not yet fully developed.” —Edersheim. 

But even though the Master is being entertained in a 
Pharisee’s home surely we cannot expect Him to conform 
to Pharisaical ways and ideas. “In etiquette, as in every 
social accomplishment, Jesus was perfect; He was entirely 
at His ease in any company, but He knew that etiquette is 
a concealment.”—Wilson. So we are not surprised that 
Jesus regarded the higher value as the more important and 
gave it place. He would not spurn love and devotion for 
social custom. When, therefore, 

2. A woman, a sinner, entered the house, contrary to 
“good form,’ and gave special attention to Jesus He did 
not rebuke her. | 

In those days, in that country, they reclined to eat. So 
Jesus’ feet would be “turned away from the table in the 
direction of the wall.” This woman evidently took unusual 
‘liberty when she entered Simon’s house. Says Geikie, 
“Houses in the East are far from enjoying the privacy we 
prize so highly. Even at this time, strangers pass in and 
out at their pleasure, to see the guests, and join in conversa- 
tion with them and the host” . . . “though women could 
not with propriety make their appearance at such entertain- 
ments.” 

Why then was she there? Likely she had heard the 
Master’s “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy 
laden,” etc. She had taken His invitation seriously. Doubt- 
less she little dreamed of what effect her unceremonious 
intrusion would have on the “dinner party.” Her soul was 
hungry. She had learned where was the “Bread of Life.” 
Her ‘alabaster cruse of ointment” bespoke her purpose in 
coming. She was there to anoint some one. But His posi- 
tion at the table as well as her modesty (for He had pro- 
voked her best) prevented her pouring the contents of her 
cruse on His head. But she could approach His feet. But 
before she could pour her perfume on His feet she was 
“weeping.” Did she think of her sins and shed the tears 
of a penitent, or was she weeping for joy at being in His 
presence? At any rate, her tears fell like drops of rain on 


166 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


His feet. (So suggests brechein, the Greek form here 
used.) Then “As if surprised, or else afraid to awaken His 
attention, or defile Him by her tears, she quickly wiped them 
away with the long tresses of her hair that had fallen down 
and touched Him as she bent over His feet.”—Edersheim. 
Then as if to express her appreciation of the feet that had 
brought Him who carried the message of peace to her 
storm-tossed soul (Rom. 10:15) she “kept kissing his feet 
and continued to anoint them with the ointment.” 

3. The Pharisee’s Opinion. 

Little wonder that Simon the Pharisee questioned the con- 
duct of the woman and soon formed an opinion of Him that 
tolerated it. No Pharisee could understand that scene! So 
his contemptuous “This man” (7:39; cf. 15:2) is fol- 
lowed by his ‘Contrary to Fact” conditional sentence. Said 
he, “If he were a prophet” (But He is not is implied). 
Simon marvelled that Jesus permitted this “forgiven” (verse 
48) though fallen woman to “touch” Him. He argued that 
Jesus must be ignorant of her character. Ah! Jesus knew 
all that and He knew of her cleansing as if all the impurity 
of her past flowed out with those hot tears which fell upon 
Him as the sins of the race lit upon His holy body and pure 
soul. Jesus “was more than a Prophet—the Saviour of 
sinners.” 

4. Jesus’ Illustration. 

The Master, reading the Pharisee’s thoughts, gave a vivid 
illustration of what He wanted Simon to apply to himself 
(verses 40-43). This was clear to Simon. From his Jew- 
ish mode of reasoning the one forgiven most would naturally 
love most. 

5. The Application—A Reproof. 

Evidently the woman had good grounds for manifesting 
love. “Her sins’ were “forgiven,” for this reason ‘“‘she 
loved much; but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth 
little.’ The attention paid Jesus by this penitent woman 
was in striking contrast to Simon’s discourteous neglect. 
Jesus’ reproof was direct. “I entered thy house (not the 
woman’s); thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she 
hath wetted my feet with her tears, and wiped them with | 
her hair, Thou gavest me no kiss: but she, since the time 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 167 


I came in, hath not ceased to kiss my feet, etc.” Com- 
parisons are always odious. Certainly the Pharisee rather 
than the woman suffered by comparison in this case. Then 
to reassure her and to further reprove him, Jesus repeated 
tosher what He had formerly related to him. ‘Thy sins 
have been forgiven.” 

6. The Query (verse 49). 

Jesus’ forgiveness of sins was ever startling to the un- 
belief of His day. No ordinary Rabbi forgave sins. So 
we naturally expect this question of surprise after Jesus has 
spoken the word of pardon. But His only reply is His, 
“Thy faith hath saved thee. Go into peace,’ addressed to 
the woman of faith. Faith, love and gratitude had come 
with her. Jesus sent her away with hope and peace. 


§ 54, Christ’s Companions on His Second Preaching 
Tour. Luke 8: 1-3. 


Of this portion of Scripture Edersheim writes, ‘Christ 
was now returning to Capernaum from that Missionary 
journey of which Nain had been the southernmost part.” 
“Instant in season and out of season,’ He was “preaching 
and bringing the good tidings of the kingdom of God.” 

But He was not alone. There accompanied Him “the 
twelve,’ His chosen ones, “and certain women which had 
been healed of evil spirits and infirmities,” trophies of his 
grace, monuments of His power over demons and disease. 

In this little group we see the nucleus of the Church. 
Men and women personally attached and greatly obligated 
to the Master went with Him to learn, assist and “‘minister 
unto them of their substance.” ‘The author of Ecce Homo 
writes, ‘“Christ’s Kingdom is a true brotherhood founded in 
devotion and self-sacrifice.” ‘Disinterested devotion” is 
here evident. 


Woman, though she first ate of the “forbidden fruit,” 
was, in keeping with God’s grace, permitted to bring the 
Redeemer, Him that would “bruise Satan’s head” (Gen. 
3:15), into the world. She was “last at the cross and first 
at the tomb.” She is here in our Lord’s own Galilee to 
minister to His needs even as she was in the house of Simon, 


168 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


the Pharisee, to care for and honor Him when He had been 
neglected by His cold, critical host. 

Ah! Woman owes much to the Saviour and wherever 
His Gospel is preached she is there to pay her debt by deeds, 
gifts and words of love. She remembers and appreciates 
that Christ’s Gospel has lifted her. Loving service is offered 
to Him whose salvation, fully realized, will one day bring 
her back to her Edenic state of equal lordship with the man, 
who under the influence of the Saviour is a ‘Christian 
Gentleman,” giving honor unto the wife as a weaker vessel 
(Peter). 

Of those in this group three are named, ‘Mary that was 
called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, 
and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and 
Susanna.” 

Edersheim notes that Mary Magdalene (i. e., Mary of 
Magdala) “not only ministered to Jesus in His life, but with 
eager avarice of love, watched ‘afar off’ His dying moments, 
and then sat over against the new tomb of Joseph in which 
His body was laid (Mat. 27:55, 56) . . . But however 
difficult the circumstances may have been, in which the 
Magdalene came to profess her faith in Jesus, those of 
Joanna must have been even more trying. She was the wife 
of Chuza, Herod’s Steward—possibly, though not likely, the 
Court-official whose son Jesus healed by the word spoken in 
Cana . . . Susanna means the ‘lily.’”’ ‘The others here 
associated with the Master are not named. Sufficient was 
their reward to minister to Him. 

Geikie in commenting on this section avails himself of 
the opportunity to note Jesus’ association with women. He 
first remarks, “The religious enthusiasm of the age, always 
seen most in the gentler sex, had already spread among all 
Jewish women, for the Pharisees found them their most 
earnest supporters.” Then he continues, “It was only nat- 
ural, therefore, that Jesus should attract a similar devotion. 
_ His purity of soul, His reverent courtesy to the sex, His 
championship of their equal dignity with man, before God, 
and His demand for supreme zeal in all, in the spread of 
the New Kingdom, drew them after Him. But so accus- 
tomed were all classes to such attendance on their own 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 169 


Rabbis, that even the enemies of Jesus found no ground for 
censure in their ministrations.” 

In referring to Mary Magdalene Geikie writes, ‘There is 
nothing whatever to connect her with the narrative of the 
anointing of Jesus in the house of Simon, the Pharisee,” for 
to do so confounds what the New Testament distinguishes 
by the clearest language. ‘The fact that she suffered from 
demoniacal possession does not prove that she led a sinful 
life. “Never before has a figment so utterly baseless ob- 
tained so wide an acceptance as that which we connect with 
her name. But it is hopeless to try to explode it, for the 
word has passed into the vocabularies of Europe as a 
synonym of penitent frailty.” 


§ 55. Warnings to the Scribes and Pharisees: “An 
Eternal Sin.” Mat. 12: 22-45; Mark 3: 20-30. 


Jesus, wearied with His strenuous preaching tour, must 
have longed for that quietness of spirit which is found only 
in solitude or in company with a few intimate friends. But 
He could not get away from the multitude even to eat. The 
crowd was curious; and Jesus’ friends were solicitous for 
Him, thinking that He had lost His mind; even His mother 
was, in company with her children, attempting to take Him 
home, probably to save the family name as well as Him. 

And, strange to say, all this stir was due to His power 
and helpfulness. He had healed one “blind and dumb” 
(Mat. 12:22). He had cast out the demon. So amazed 
were the people that they asked, “Is this the son of David?” 
The Pharisees’ reply to this reveals their maliciousness. 
Their jealousy was evident; their unfairness was patent. 
They attributed His power over demons to Beelzebub, the 
old god of the Philistine city of Ekron, but by the Jews 
regarded as Satan. Beelzebub means “god of flies.” The 
Jews had, at times, disdainfully changed this word to 
Beelzebub, “god of dung.” 

It is clear that according to the Pharisees Christ’s deeds 
were Satan’s doings. Thus He was incarnating Satan. So, 
as they fancied, Christ’s kingdom was not God’s but Satan’s. 

But Jesus’ reply was a refutation of their groundless 
charge. If Satan had used his power to cast out demons, 


170 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


his own aids, then his kingdom would have been divided 
against itself. “It was proverbial that civil strife is fatal 
to a state.”—Bruce. Then the Jews were exorcists. So 
Jesus, turning their argument upon them, asked, ‘“‘And if 
I by Beelzebub cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast 
them out?” Were they willing to admit that Satan wrought 
through them? 


Then follows His own statement of the case, “But if I, 
by the Spirit of God, cast out demons, then is the kingdom 
of God come upon you.” The Spirit of God, working 
through Jesus of Nazareth, was spoiling Satan’s house. 
He could bind the strong man, and He did so, and then did 
as He pleased with the house. And these Pharisees, not 
being “with” Christ, were “against” Him. They would 
have scattered His work. But every blow aimed at Him, 
“the Son of man,” fell upon the Holy Spirit. Now “Son 
of man” is Christ’s human name. By this designation He 
loved to be known upon earth, for it told the story of His 
humiliation (Phil. 2), His identification with mankind. As 
the “Son of man” He ‘“‘came to seek and to save” the lost 
(Lu. 19:10). So the “Word” incarnate is “the Son of 
man.” Over this the Jews stumbled and He could have 
forgiven them for not recognizing Him, but when they 
attributed the works done through Him to Satan, they were 
crediting the devil with the works of the Holy Spirit and 
so discrediting the Third Person of the Godhead. 


These Pharisees said the wrong thing. As Mark puts it, 
they were “guilty of an eternal sin: because they said, He 
hath an unclean spirit. Christ’s works were good. Why 
should they attribute them to Satan? So their sin ex- 
pressed itself in glib talk. Jesus reminded them of their 
_ responsibility for “every idle word.” Jdle here means un- 
profitable. Their words, to translate the Greek word lit- 
erally, did not work. And words mark us. They disclose 
the heart. “For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and 
by thy words thou shalt be condemned.” A good tree pro- 
duces good fruit. So “the tree is known by its fruit.” 
Christ was good and the fruit of His life was good; the 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 171 


Pharisees bore such fruits that Jesus could not consider 
them to be of God. Geikie says that their sin was such as 
to indicate that the “Religious faculty was destroyed.” For 
by them the “Holy Spirit, by whom alone the heart is 
changed was contemned as evil.” 

In keeping with the thought of the preceding verses 
when Jesus was asked for a “sign” by the scribes and 
Pharisees, He replied that “An evil and adulterous genera- 
tion seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given 
to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet.” To the Ninevites 
Jonah’s sign was his message with its clear, authoritative, 
prophetic ring. While Jonah’s three days’ experience “in 
the belly of the whale” was such as to give him a message 
with a certain sound to “the men of Nineveh,” yet Christ 
was “a greater than Jonah” before His death and resur- 
rection which Jonah’s experiences prefigured. So “The 
men of Nineveh shall stand up in the judgment with this 
generation and shall condemn it: for they repented at the 
preaching of Jonah; and behold a greater than Jonah is 
here.” The Ninevites had keener spiritual perception than 
the Pharisees, though the latter were experts in religion 
while the former were Gentiles and mostly ignorant (Jonah 
4:11). Likewise the “Queen of the south,’ who gladly 
heard Solomon, showed ability to appreciate wisdom and 
worth, such as these religious leaders among the Jews 
lacked. 

Appropriate to this discussion of casting out demons is 
that of providing something to occupy the place formerly 
held by the demon. If the house is simply cleansed of 
demons—‘“swept and garnished’”—(Edersheim believes this 
refers to Israel as a house cleansed from the demon of 
idolatry and “garnished” with all manner of Pharisaic 
adornment), if the house is only cleansed of evil 
spirits and not filled with the Holy Spirit, “the last state 
. . . becometh worse than the first.” The “evil generation,” 
addressed by Jesus, was worse than idolatrous heathen. 
The Stronger One was not within to keep out the strong one. 
Yet the Pharisees were quite sufficient, as they supposed, 
in matters religious, 


172 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 56. The True Kindred of Christ. Mat. 12: 46-50; 
Mark 3: 31-35; Luke 8: 19-21. 


The scene is easily imagined. Jesus is inside. His mother 
and brothers are without calling to Him to come out and 
go home. But the crowd prevents His hearing. Whatever 
the people thought as to Jesus’ duty to His mother, He in- 
sisted that the interests of the Kingdom came first. 

We see a thronging crowd, an engaged Christ, a con- 
cerned parent and brothers, and loyal disciples. The people 
needed Christ, His message and ministry. His kin wanted 
to save Him and maybe enjoy Him. He knew His duty 
and real kin. 

Notice the dignity Matthew gives to Him. “He stretched 
forth lis hand.” As Ahasuerus extended the royal scepter 
to Esther. 


Mark says, “And looking round.” ‘The ministry of a 
look. A servant may look. ‘So again when He spoke of 
His cross and Peter began to rebuke Him, here only we 
read, ‘And when he had turned about and looked on his 
disciples, he rebuked Peter’ (Mk. 8:33). There must have 
been something in that look never to be forgotten; a flash 
of light, a beam of the glory, which made its dwelling in 
that lowly Servant. So again in the case of him who came 
kneeling down and asking, ‘What shall I do to inherit 
eternal life?’ here only do we read that Jesus, looking upon 
him, loved him, etc. Surely not in vain is the look recorded. 
Let servants mark this: there is no small ministry in a 
single look, be it of love or grief or anger. It may speak 
what words cannot express . . . It speaks truly, hence 
its deep power” (Jukes). 


It is striking to note how the Synoptics record what Jesus 
said when He was describing His spiritual kingdom. Mat- 
thew says: “Whosoever shall do the will of my Father,” 
etc. But Mark has God instead of Father. Matthew, 
writing to and for the Jews who already believe in God, is 
interested in having them believe in God as Father. And 
not only Father, but “my” Father. Surely He asserted that 
God was His Father in a special sense. He was “‘the only 
begotten Son,” hence the Messiah of the Jews. And Mat- 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 173 


thew makes Him further limit the idea of Father by adding 
“which is in heaven.’”’ Certainly He never recognized Joseph 
as His father. The reference is to His Father, God. He 
was pene on His earthly side of the “seed of woman” (Gen. 
Rh oy) 

Mark, who writes to the practical Romans, simply shows 
that doing the will of God signifies true kinship with Christ. 
The Romans care little for anything prophetical or theo- 
logical in any sense. They are satisfied with just plain God. 

Luke, who thinks of the message of salvation through 
Christ as it affects the whole wide world and hence appre- 
ciates the need of evangelism that every ear might hear, 
says, “My mother and my brethren are these which hear the 
word of God and do it.” “Faith cometh by hearing.” Do- 
ing presupposes hearing, but Luke thinks of this and so 
expresses it. He sees the possibility of a brotherhood of 
faith and obedience. 


§ 57. The Parables by the Sea. Mat. 13: 1-53; Mark 
4: 1-34; Luke 8: 4-18. 


PRELIMINARY REMARKS ON PARABLES 


Parables were occasioned by unreceptiveness on the part 
of hearers. They were common among Jewish teachers. 
They are the outlined shadows—large, perhaps, and dim— 
as the light-of heavenly things falls on well-known scenes 
which correspond to and have their higher counterpart in 
spiritual realities. Earth and heaven are twin parts of His 
work. 

A problem arises in Mat. 13: 10-16. On this Edersheim 
says: “On the other hand, in answer to the disciples, the 
Lord specially marks this as the difference between the 
teaching vouchsafed to them and the parables spoken to the 
people, that the designed effect of the latter was judicial: 
to complete that hardening which in its commencement had 
been caused by their voluntary rejection of what they had 
heard . . . Ground of different effect on unbelieving 
multitude and believing disciples was subjective and not 
objective; i. e., their attitude toward the kingdom of God 
rather than the form or substance of the parables.” Jesus 


174 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


had spoken in clear unequivocal language, but unbelief had 
stopped their ears, hence their rejection. 


One could not be believing that Jesus tried to conceal 
truth by parables, which truth, if accepted, would have 
saved. But His parables had the effect of concealing truth. 


Jesus is calling for decision. Parables provoke decision. 


Rev. George Soltau in his “Four Portraits of the Lord 
Jesus Christ” states that since Jesus had been officially re- 
jected by the Jewish Sanhedrin, He taught in parables not 
to conceal the truth, but to so partially veil it that only in- 
quirers would be able to understand. So he explains Mat. 
13:14, quoting Isa. 6. Soltau points out that Jesus eagerly 
explained to the interested and that today it is so. ‘To the 
multitudes now the Lord’s words are as hidden as in His 
own time.” 


Etymologically the word parable is from the Greek para- 
bole, meaning to place one thing. by the side of another. 
Christ used them for the foundation of His teaching. 
Scenes familiar to everyday life were used to corivey the 
message of the Master Teacher because these scenes were 
typical or symbolical of some phase of Kingdom Truth, 

Of these parables spoken by the sea, four—The Sower, 
The Tares, The Mustard Seed, and The Leaven—were 
spoken to the people and the disciples; while three—The 
Hid Treasure, The Pearl, and The Net—were spoken to the 
disciples alone. 


There were in all these parables not only the “‘photo- 
graphic” but also the “prophetic.” In the latter respect they 
differed from the parables used by Jewish teachers. In the 
parables Jesus took a picture of Kingdom Truth and facts 
and painted it in colors that should have made it clear to 
Fis hearers had they had eyes to see. The scenes and situa- 
tions spoken of were familiar to all, but the meaning back 
of the word pictures were not clear to them. ‘The Kingdom 
was a mystery, and the familiar figures and forms used to 
portray it were likewise mysterious so far as reading any 
sensible meaning into them was concerned. ‘The poor preju- 
diced people could read no suitable meaning in what Jesus 
said; they could not interpret or “perceive.” 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 175 


Consider: 

1. THE PARABLE OF THE SOWER. 

A. Christ is here pictured as a Sower (cf. 13:3 and 13: 
37). Says Soltau, “No one will look twice at such a fa- 
miliar and ordinary man.” Surely Matthew here pictures 
Him as the rejected King; yet, if we glance at Mark’s 
account, we cannot but recall what Edersheim relates that 
sowing was frequently done by beasts of burden. ‘True to 
Mark’s conception, we see the Master as a faithful ox, with 
a large perforated sack filled with corn, going forth that the 
seed may scatter. This figure will help us to understand 
how some seed would fall on the beaten path; some among 
the rocks; some among the thorns; and yet some on good 
ground. The ox went, and the seed fell. He carried the 
precious seed, and it fell wherever he should chance to go. 
So the teaching of the Kingdom fell on all kinds of hearts. 
From Luke’s viewpoint we shall be interested to see the 
generosity of Christ as a sower; seed was not spared. 

The Jewish idea of the Messianic Kingdom was one of 
outward display. Hence the suggestiveness of the parables 
was lost. 

B. The Nature of the Soil. It was of four kinds: “way- 
side” soil; i. e., a hard beaten path; “stony places” or soil 
covering edges of rock; soil growing thorns, and “good 
ground.” 

From the explanation of Christ given in Mat. 13: 18-23, 
Mark 4: 13-20, Luke 8:11-15, it is quite clear that there 
are in general four different classes of hearers. 

(a) Those that simply hear but do not heed. ‘These are 
of the general nature as is described and exhorted in Heb. 
2:1,2 (R. V.). Satan can easily gainsay what falls on a 
‘hard heart. Mark notes that straightway cometh Satan 
“as a hungry bird and snatcheth away the seed,” and Luke, 
thinking of Gentile ignorance and need, adds “that they 
may not believe and be saved.”” These are the preoccupied, 
unreceptive souls, and so calloused and seared that they are 
as unimpressionable to truth as an adamant is to moisture or 
seed. The seed would never bury itself. The resistance of 
the wayside is greater than the weight of the seed. Seed on 
such soil is wasted. 


176 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


(b) Those that seem to be prepared to receive the mes- 
sage of truth but are really too shallow. The rocks and 
ledges are too near the surface. ‘The intellectual or the 
sentimental is appealed to, and there seems to be a hearty 
response; but when the roots try to grow down deep into 
the heart of hearts, they meet with resistance. Something 
impenetrable is there. The individual says to Christ, ‘“Thus 
far and no farther.” A passing interest or fancy has ad- 
mitted the Heavenly Guest into the reception hall, but an- 
other really more desirable 1s occupying the guest chamber. 
So the unappreciated One must leave. The seed could not 
bring forth fruit to maturity when the tap root is hindered 
in its growth. Being only on the surface, the plant is easily 
dislodged by the wind of tribulation, or washed out by the 
water of strife, or withered by the heat of persecution. This 
accounts for the stumbling and falling of many so-called 
converts. They.are too tall for their weight. They are top 
heavy. The weighty, meaty message of full salvation has 
never filled their hearts. What a descriptionsof this class 
as well as a warning to it is found in Heb. 6:1-9. They 
lack a sure “foundation” which, to change the figure, is to 
a building what a tap root is toa plant. They engage them- 
selves with “doctrines” rather than life. They have been 
“enlightened” and have “tasted’’ and so experienced the 
Holy Spirit, at least in conviction, and have taken in some 
of God’s Word, and even have sampled Canaan’s fruit or 
smelt the brimstone of Hades, yet they reject the fullness 
of Christ and so make void His crucifixion for themselves. 
How are they unlike ‘“‘the earth which drinketh in the rain.”’ 


(c) Those that receive the Word, but are too much en- 
grossed with other things to give it room. They will not 
weed out. ‘They are either dilatory or enjoy the weeds. 
Cares they carry rather than cast them upon Christ. Riches 
they rely upon for what they promise. The lusts of other 
things they indulge for their fleshly gratification. When the 
heart is filled with worry, fret, and care, with houses, lands, 
bank accounts and other commodities, with sensations from 
incontinence, there is not enough room for Christ. As upon 
His birth, if the inn is full with what seem to be important 
guests, He must go to an empty place even though it be a 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 177 


manger. Thorny soil chokes out the wheat. It cannot 
mature. 

(d) Those that give the Word a proper reception. Mat- 
thew says they “hear and understand’; Mark, “hear and 
accept’; Luke, “Hear the word in an honest and good 
heart.” ‘They are unlike the “wayside” soil which never 
accepts or receives; unlike the “stony ground” soil which 
never understands because it lacks depth; and unlike the 
“thorny” soil which never can be really honest and good so 
long as it harbors inimical influences. 

But even in this soil not all seed brings in a maximum re- 
turn. Of course, it is the soil that is to blame, not the seed. 
Here we with sadness realize our meager fruitage and blame 
only ourselves or simply note the condition without blaming 
God, but press on with the urge, “Herein is my Father 
glorified that ye bear much fruit.” Thankful are we for the 
little minimum return of fruit, lest the Master curse us as 
He did the leafy fig tree. The blessed man bringeth forth 
his fruit in his season as well as is consistently adorned with 
unwithered leaves (Psalm 1). 

So we ask God to prepare our hearts for the seed of His 
truth lest we be “hard hearted” “wayside” hearers as were 
the antediluvians, the Sodomites, Pharaoh, and Chorazin 
and Bethsaida of later time; lest we be shallow with un- 
belief as were the ten spies who “saw but never experi- 
enced;’’ lest we be worldly as was Demas who finally left 
Paul; but rather that we may become “open, true and good” 
for His message. 

The record of Mark 4: 21-25 and Luke 8: 16-18 seems 
to be to the same end as Mat. 13: 13-17 amplifies. It im- 
presses the responsibility for light. 

“Light received increaseth light; 
Light rejected bringeth night. 


Who can give me power to choose 
If the love of light I lose?” 


Hence, “Take heed what ye hear” as well as “how ye 
hear.” 
2. THE PARABLE OF THE TarES—Mat. 13: 24-30. 


Jukes notes that the parable of the Tares is found in Mat- 
thew rather than Mark. Says he, ‘The reason is plain. 
12 | 


178 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


The parable of the Tares gives our Lord the place of power. 
Such words as these, ‘In the time of harvest, I will say to 
the reaper, Gather first the tares and bind them into bundles, 
and burn them,’ though exactly suited to the Lord of the 
kingdom, are for that very reason out of character here, 
and as such are not recorded.” 

“Tares” suggest the element of mixture so characteristic 
of our age. ae 

We notice that when the tares were observed, it was the 
“over officious” servants who were eager to “gather up” the 
undesirable tares, but the “Sir’ foresaw that while this was 
being done, they would “root up the wheat also.” So the 
wisdom of Him that sowed the good seed held in check the 
“inconsiderate zeal” of the servants. Servants are apt to be 
so bent on getting the smile of approval from their master 
that they disregard real values to do this. So henchmen, 
caddies, lackeys are so often despicable simply because in 
their loyalty to him who feeds them they disregard truth, 
honor, or right. 

Of course the “tares” provoked both the owner of the 
field and his servants. They told of the work of an enemy 
who “while they slept . . . over sowed” what had already 
been sowed. (For the Greek original tells the story in the 
word translated sowed in the King James. The implication 
is that the enemy sowed his seed over or on top of and hence 
after the real sower had sown his.) ‘Thus Satan gets in his 
work. He is a usurper. He works hardest where Jesus’ 
work has been most successful. 

Fdersheim gives various possibilities as to what the 
“‘tares” may have been. A glance at these will be instruc- 
tive. 

(a) Bearded Darnel, a poisonous rye grass, very common 
in the East, entirely like wheat until the ear appears. This 
_ would answer to verse 26 of our narrative. “But when the 
blade sprang up and brought forth fruit, then appeared the 
tares also.’ Just so in a spiritual way there are those who 
appear to be real Christians until it comes to fruit bearing. 
Their lives seem to be Christian, but where is the grain? 
The analogy is too severe to be pressed. Its contemplation 
might cause an unwholesome self-examination or actual but 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 179 


needless pain to supersensitive souls. Suffice it to say that 
no Christian would be aught else but ashamed to go into the 
presence of his Lord “empty-handed.” This suggests to us 
the story of the young man who, after being saved for 30 
days, was on his death bed when he was asked if he were 
afraid to die. He replied, “No, but must I go and empty- 
handed?” C. C. Luther took up the plaintive interrogation, 
so full of a sense of shame and expressive of genuine self- 
depreciation, and wrote the following stanzas, to which 
George C. Stebbins wrote the music. 
“Must I go and empty-handed, 
Thus my dear Redeemer meet? 
Not one day of service give Him? 
Lay no trophy at His feet? 
“Not at death I shrink and falter, 
For my Saviour saves me now; 


But to meet Him empty-handed, 
Tho’t of that now clouds my brow. 


“Oh, the years of sinning wasted! 
Could I but recall them now, 

I would give them to my Saviour; 
To His will I’d gladly bow. 


“O ye saints, arouse, be earnest! 
Up and work while yet ’tis day; 

Ere the night of death o’ertake thee, 
Strive for souls while still ye may. 
Chorus: 

“Must I go and empty-handed ? 
Must I meet my Saviour so? 
Not one soul with which to greet Him; 
Must I empty-handed go?” 


We rather contemplate the experience expressed in the 
grand old missionary hymn: 


“The tears of the sower and the songs of the reaper 
Shall mingle together in joy bye and bye.” 


Whether we sow or reap, just so we have a share in the 
fruitage will satisfy us. 

(b) Creeping-wheat or Couch-grass, of which the roots 
creep under ground and become intertwined with those of 
the wheat. This possibility very vividly portrays to us how 
disastrous would have been an attempt on the part of the 
servants, whose zeal exceeded their knowledge, to separate 


180 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


the wheat from the tares. Certain intimate relationships in 
life are suggested to us here. The one, of a marriage where 
one of the parties has embraced Christianity while the 
other has not done so, is illustrative on this point. In 1 Cor. 
7:12, Paul says, “If any brother hath a wife that believeth 
not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put 
her away. And the woman which hath an husband which 
believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her 
not leave him.” 


But contrary to the idea of a separation when their mar- 
ried life is ended, Paul suggests the possibility of the un- 
saved partner’s becoming converted. ‘For what knowest 
thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how 
knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?” 


Peter also shows this as not simply a possibility, but a 
probability, a likelihood. “Likewisé, ye wives, be in sub- 
jection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the 
word, they also may without the word, be won by the con- 
versation of the wives,” etc. (1 Pet. 3:1-6). Herein we 
note that to root up and carry out to destruction precludes 
the possibility of salvation and may greatly disturb much 
tender wheat which even leans against the tares. 

Our Master tolerated and taught the fickle multitude, the 
antagonistic Pharisees, the traitorous Judas, though He 
could not convert them. He faced the fact of tares, human, 
flesh and blood “‘tares,” and went patiently on. For, said 
He, “I have chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil’ 
(John 6:70). Satan had successfully “over-sowed” Judas. 

Jesus by these parables taught His disciples who had 
come out of the Jewish mould of non-conformity and intoler- 
ance. He taught them a lesson in the genius of the 
kingdom. Wheat will be wheat; tares are tares. Let them 
alone when it is a guess as to identity. You might get 
tares and wheat mixed, and oh, the tragedy of rejecting one 
stalk of wheat. Better tolerate ten tares. 


(c) “But the parable gains in meaning if we bear in 
mind that according to ancient Jewish (and indeed, modern 
Eastern) ideas, the “tares’” were not of different seed, but 
only a degenerate kind of wheat.’ Rabbinism has it that 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 18] 


the ground had been guilty of fornication before the flood, 
so that when wheat was sown, tares sprang up. 

This view reminds us that so long as we are in the world, 
we may count on evil as a factor. Perfection is not pos- 
sible here. ‘The most beautiful face is marred by some 
slight blemish. The whitest page has some flaw. ‘The most 
successiul day has some cause for regret. Utopia is ‘“no- 
where.” The Brook Farm, the Economites, the Zoarites, 
the Dowieites are idealists, dreamers, but are working con- 
trary to the principle of this parable. Seclusion makes for 
snobbery. After we have “picked our company’? we must 
yet be ready for an occasional tare if not a “terror,” though 
not a “holy terror.” 

A failure to observe this principle of patient waiting until 
“Age-Completion” and “Angel-Reaping”’ sent Huss to the 
stake, caused France to drive out the Huguenots, and thus 
“tap her artery and let flow her life blood” and drove Roger 
Williams into the forest in the dead of winter. Let us have 
well defined convictions, but let us beware lest we pluck up 
wheat for tares. When in doubt, do nothing. The angels 
will act. “Be patient brethren!” 

Then, if tares are degenerate wheat, let us “not be high- 
minded, but fear.’ For if God spared not the natural 
branches, “take heed lest he spare not thee.’ ‘Behold, there- 
fore, the goodness and severity of God; on them which fell 
severity, but toward thee goodness, if thou continue in his 
goodness: otherwise thou shalt be cut off” (Rom. 11:20- 
22): 

In the very company with Jesus and His true disciples 
was Judas, who, ere long, was to be manifest asatare. Thus 
even among the very chosen ones there may be tares known 
not by their place or position in the field but by their fruits, 
yet these may not be altogether bad and so may cause some 
doubt. Hence the exhortation, “Let both grow together.” 

Edersheim points out how Church History shows actual 
attempts “to make the wheat unmixed while growing by 
gathering out the tares.” Says he “All such have proved a 
failure because the field is the wide ‘world’ not a narrow 
sect.” Let us then do only what He bids. He never ordered 
tare gathering. 


182 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


3. THe Mustarp SEED. 


Three features of this parable are to be noted. 

1. The small seed. 

2. The tree which comes from the little seed. 

3. The birds that lodge in the branches of this tree. 


So small was the mustard seed that the Rabbis used it to 
indicate the smallest thing, such as “a drop of blood” the 
least defilement, etc. From this grows what looks no 
longer like a large garden herb or shrub but “becomes” or 
rather appears like “a tree.” St. Luke has it “a great tree’ 
(A. V.); i. €., in comparison with the vegetables. This 
speaks of the extensiveness of the kingdom. Soltau stresses 
the fact that he believes the apparently abnormal growth is 
the point to be noted, and hence would refer to the abnormal 
development of a Christian system which is only so-called. 
Historically we think of Constantine’s work when the state 
religion became Christian by the Emperor’s encouragement, 
or of Charlemagne’s conversion of the Germanic peoples, or 
the rule of Papal power. , 

Since this parable is not interpreted, we must tread softly ; 
but it does seem to represent a situation in which the Church 
is potent and popular, and hence all men fly to its shelter 
even as the birds fly to a tree. On this Silver says, “But 
the Laodicean church at the approaching end of this age has 
its denominational branches bending under the weight of 
fowls that are foul in more than one particular. Close 
observers see the corrupt political fowl, the greedy financial 
fowl, the bloated whiskey fowl, the licentious society fowl, 
and many a gorgeous bird of fashion. ‘They are not all 
doves and yet they lodge in the tree. Few become doves.” 

But who knows but that Jesus desired to teach that there 
_ will come a time when all kingdoms of the earth will be 
under His sway? Ps. 2. 


4. Tur LEAVEN. 


In this parable E;dersheim sees the intensiveness of the 
kingdom. This view would cause us to look forward to a 
time when “all shall know the Lord from the least unto the 
greatest.’’ But we premillenialists steer clear of this inter- 
pretation because our “post” friends use the parable to show 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 183 


how the world is being gradually Christianized. It may, 
however, pre-view the millennial accomplishment. 


However, it seems to coincide with Scripture to think of 
leaven as sin, “evil working subtilely.” 


The parable could not teach that all the world will be 
Christianized before Christ comes because this would vio- 
late the truth of the parable of the tares which evidently is 
that good and evil apparently will go on side by side until 
“the consummation of the age.” (marg. R. V.—See Mat. 
£2159.) 

Christian writers so generally use the expression “leaven” 
to signify the general diffusion of Christian doctrine that it 
is well for us to be able to know what they mean. The 
premillennial tocsin is so well sounded by Jesse Forest Silver 
that I shall quote from him. “If we say, however, that the 
Gospel leavens the world, what does this prove?) Leaven 
Operates as it proceeds, and the mass through which it has 
passed is then leavened. Take the city of Jerusalem as the 
center of the lump to be leavened. After 1900 years is 
Jerusalem leavened? Moshein tells us that the Gospel first 
penetrated into the immense empire of China about the year 
637, and that there are unexceptionable proofs that the 
northern parts of China, even before this country, abounded 
with Christians. Alas, brethren, where are the remains of 
those churches now? Has that portion of China been leav- 
ened since the seventh century? The Nestorians who dwelt 
in Syria, Persia and India, preached to the fierce and bar- 
barous nations who lived in the remotest borders and deserts 
of Asia with remarkable success. The parable of the leaven 
at every turn fails to prove what some have read between its 
lines. No spot on earth is now enjoying millennial glory 

. The devil, loose, finds access to every sanctuary. 
Mighty revivals are often followed by fearful apostasy. 
Millennial glory, world-wide in extent and a thousand years 
long in duration, will follow the Lord’s return.” —The Lord’s 
Return, pp. 248, 9. 

Soltau after discussing the two views as to the leaven 
parable concludes, “And therefore in St. Matthew’s Gospel 
it seems right to make the mustard seed represent abnormal 


184 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


growth never intended, and the leaven the symbol of the 
working of error in doctrine.” 


Let E. D. Burton and Shailer Mathews state the case for 
the postmillennial school. ‘This is one of the most instruc- 
tive parables uttered by Jesus. ‘Leaven,’ yeast, the symbol, 
not of corruption but of transformation through contact. 
This may be evil (Gal. 5:9) or good, as here. ‘Till all 
was leavened.’ Like the parable of the mustard seed, this 
indicates the wonderful growth of the kingdom. So small 
as to be hidden in the world, it will yet transform all. ‘The 
parable also indicates how the kingdom is to grow; viz., by 
transforming its surroundings. This implies, (a) a gradual 
process; (b) the operation of social forces rather than 
miraculous intervention during the period of the growth 
of the kingdom. In this parable Jesus has composed an 
entire philosophy of social regeneration. And He was pro- 
ducing the ‘yeast’ in the persons of His disciples, especially 
the Twelve.” 

Let us briefly criticize this. Why is this parable “one of 
the most instructive”? Clearly to them because they believe 
that in it “Jesus has composed an entire philosophy of social 
regeneration.” But Jesus would not teach here a philosophy 
contrary to that of the “‘tares’”’ in which good and evil are 
together until the reaping time. It is easy to show how 
leaven stands for evil. Just refer to Gal. 5:9. But why 
say “or good” and then “as here.” This is like defining a 
horse by saying “A horse is a horse.’”’ No wonder the 
believers in “Social regeneration” overwork this parable. 
It misapplied, as we believe, is their sole ground for the 
theory. But what of the other parables? Surely in them 
is much ground for a belief in no entire “gradual” “operation 
of social forces” until the kingdom is here in its perfection. 

5. PARABLE OF THE Hip TREASURE. 

Probably Scofield’s interpretation of this parable is the 
best. (See Scofield Bible.) Jukes, however, suggests that 
this parable gives God’s viewpoint as to the value of the 
Church. It is true that Christ left heaven for earth simply 
to ‘seek and to save that which was lost” (cf. Phil. 2: 5-11 
and Luke 19:10). This view would make the unredeemed 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 185 


possible Church the “hid treasure,’ the world “the field,” 
and Christ the “man.” 


6. THE PARABLE OF THE PEARL—Mat. 13: 45-46. 


This parable shows us how the Church, even though in 
mystery (Rom. 16: 25-26; Eph. 3: 3-10; 5:32) is of such 
great value to our Lord. As the “merchant” of the parable 
“sold all that he had and bought” the pearl, so Christ tempo- 
rarily “emptied Himself’? to redeem the Church. So the 
Pearl is ‘of great price” because it cost so much. Then it 
is “of great price’ because it satisfies the heart of Christ. 
He was willing to pay dearly for the Church because He 
saw it as a groom sees a bride in whom his soul delights. 

We shall venture a few analogies between the Pearl and 
the Church to make the subject concrete and meaningful. 


a. As the pearl is of a peculiar luster, satisfying the eye 
with its iridescent sheen, so the Church as Christ’s bride is 
altogether lovely as it reflects His manifold grace and 
unspeakable glory. (S. S. 5:16.) 

b. As a pearl is formed by the intrusion of a foreign 
substance between the mantel and the shell of the mollusk, 
where it is encysted by secretion from the mollusk, so we 
are “aliens” (Eph. 2:12) by birth, and hence “foreign” 
to Christ, by whose life we are made fit to become sharers 
of His glory. We simply recognize that we are parasitic, 
and hence our new share is all of grace. 

c. As this foreign substance is first lodging between the 
mantel and the shell of the mollusk, it is a source of irrita- 
tion. How this sinful world must have irritated the 
sensitive spirit of the Saviour. If Sodom’s sin vexed Lot’s 
soul (2 Pet. 2:7-8), how much more must the world’s 
iniquity have harrowed the heart of the Son of God. Little 
wonder we read of the “woes” in Mat. 23 where also we 
hear Him bemoan Jerusalem’s obstinacy. And from this 
selfsame world we were taken, carrying over much that 
should have been left in Egypt. But praise God, we have 
become identified with Christ. As the mollusk encases the 
particles of sand, so we have been covered with the Christ 
life; we have “put on Christ.” 

d. Now these pearls when most desirable are free from 


186 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


speck or flaw. They are translucent; i. e., the light passes 
through them although one cannot see through them. So 
one of the most desirable qualities of the Church is to let the 
“light of life” through. Their subdued color speaks to us 
of that desirable modesty which is so comely and becoming 
when characteristic of a saint whose colorful personality 
must be mellowed and toned down that Christ may be mag- 
nified. 

e. It is suggestive that shells of irregular shape and 
stunted growth, bearing excrescences and being honey- 
combed by boring parasites are most likely to yield pearls. 
Was not our Saviour “marred” as to His visage and form 
(Isa. 52:14) when He was doing His redemptive work? 
(Isa. 53:2). He went through the travail necessary to 
the birth of a new redeemed race. 

f. Pearls are valued as objects of personal adornment. So 
the Church is prized by Christ as she adorns His teaching. 
The doctrine seems beautiful or ugly according as it is set 
off by sanctified lives. (Titus 2:10.) Let us garnish the 
Gospel platter. 

g. Few shells yield true pearls. These come from the deep 
sea and not the shallow, unreliable river. So only from the 
ocean of God’s love can real Christians be produced. 

h. A pearl to be round and symmetrically developed must 
be unattached, must have freedom of play. Here we dis- 
tinguish between the “mother of pearl,’ which is really the 
same substance as the pearl but which cannot move because 
of attachment. This reminds us of how many become 
entangled in the world and so lose in symmetry and value. 
Hence we distinguish between the visible and the invisible 
Church. The latter has “come out from among them” and 
is “separate.” In it are the saints—separated ones. ‘These 
are pearls of great price, or better, comprise one pearl, to 
think of our being a corporate unity—one body. Pearl— 
“Christ’s estimate of the loveliness of grace in His redeemed 
children.” 


7. PARABLE OF THE DRAGNET. Mat. 13: 47. 


On this parable Edersheim says “The closing parable of 
the Dragnet was not less needful. Assuredly it became 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 187 


and would more and more become them to know that mere 
discipleship, mere inclusion in the Gospel net was not suf- 
ficient. That net let down into the sea of this world would 
include much which, when the net was at last drawn to 
shore, would prove worthless or even hurtful. To be a 
disciple, then, was not enough. Even here there would be 
separation. Not only the tares which the enemy designedly 
had sown into the midst of the wheat, but even much that 
the Gospel net, cast into the sea, had enclosed would, when 
brought to land, prove fit only to be cast away into the oven 
of the fire where there is the wailing and the gnashing of 
teeth. 


Does not this parable set forth that the “Net’’ or the 
“visible Church” the organized Church, the sphere of pro- 
fession, as it is dragged into and through the sea of the 
world, will enclose both “good;” i. e., satisfying fish, and 
“bad;” i. e., worthless fish? This word “bad” is used (mean- 
ing “worthless” ) in Mat. 7:17, 18, and Luke 6:43. What- 
ever may be the particular qualities of these “bad” fish, this 
much we know, they will be of no value to the fisherman. 
The angels will know what fish are to be discarded. They 
will select. But let us look into the possibilities of a net but 
beware lest we out-Origen Origen. These are simply sug- 
gestive ideas rather than exegetical in the strict sense. 

What did the “Every Kind” include? 

1. Possibilities. 

a. Tortoise—‘‘snapper” may have slipped into that sea for 
a bath and found himself in a net. Paul’s warning, “Be- 
ware of dogs . . . Beware of the concision” is pertinent 
here. He was referring to “snappy, snarlish” men who 
would “cut out’ those not to their fancy. Same as “Tare” 
pullers (Phil. 3:2). Doctrinal experts read folks out and 
off. 

b. Crawfish—“Backer” suggests those who put their hand 
to the plow and look back and hence become unfit for the 
kingdom. Lot’s wife looked back because of interests in 
Sodom. 

c. Eel—“slippery.” “Alexander the coppersmith hath 
done me much evil, of whom be thou ware also.”’ Look out 


188 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


for the fellows who “slide out” of things. They are so 
adroit that it is hard to catch them. 


d. Crocodile—‘“Sleeper’’—sleeps until time to go home to 
dinner. When he hears a baby cry or a pig squeal, he sud- 
denly opens his eyes. A “Christian crocodile” is drowsy 
only when things that fail to interest him are involved, 
“stuffs himself” and lolls selfishly. “High time to awaken 
out of your sleep, for now is salvation nearer than when 

. . first believed.” Cf. Eph. 3:14 with 1 Cor. 11:30. 
Note “not discerning.” 


__ e. Water Frog—“Jumper.” ‘Demas hath forsaken me 

having loved this present world” (Col. 4: 14). 

The Church has always been burdened with a surfeit of 
“excess baggage.” Simon Magus had been baptized (Acts 
8). Constantine “paganized Christianity in his attempt to 
Christianize the pagans” wholesale. Charlemagne brought 
in “every kind” by compulsion. Witness the Papacy and 
even the Church of God at Corinth (1 Cor. 1:2 ie 

These remind one of : 

a. Lancelot—a sub-fish. 

(a) Dwells in the sand in warm seas—“‘earthy.”’ 
(b) Has no backbone—cartilagenous, hence lack- 
ing in rectitude. 

Tossed to and fro and carried about with every 
wind and wave of doctrine. 

(c) No brain. 

Such characters as Louis XV of France who 
would go to worship and shed great tears 
over his sins and then go back to his para- 
mour. 

(d) No eyes. 

Paul prayed that the eyes of their understand- 
ing ought to be opened. Eph. 1: 18. 

(e) No scales—no protection or cause of beauty. 
Scales on fish answer same purpose as 
feathers on a bird, clothes on a man, typical 
of righteousness in Bible. Our righteousness 
is as filthy rags, etc. 

(f) No heart—calloused. 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 189 


b. Lamprey—a Parasite. Feeds on blood of other fishes, 
which it sucks after scraping a hole in the 
flesh. The parasitic Christian is satisfied to 
cling to and take from others than Jesus. 


As only the disciples were with Christ when He finished 
these parables, He asked them if they understood these 
things. They said “Yea.” Then He reminded them of 
their wealth and compared them to “a householder which 
bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.” 
That is, He told them that new things would be theirs from 
time to time. Their old experiences would be repeated, and 
new ones awaited them. Just so with us. 

These parables were “dim shadowy outlines, growing 
larger in their tracings to the people; shadowy outlines 
growing brighter and clearer to all who were disciples . . 

. even negative critics admit to have really formed part 
of Christ’s own original teaching.” 

The marvel is, as Edersheim puts it, “Has not history in 
the strange unexpected fulfilling of that which no human 
ingenuity at the time could have forecast, and no pen de- 
scribe with more minute accuracy of detail, proved Him to 
be more than a mere man—One sent from God—the Divine 
King of the Divine Kingdom, in all the vicissitudes which 
such a Divine Kingdom must experience when set up on 
earth P” 


§ 58. The Stilling of the Tempest. Mat. 8:18, 23- 
27; Mark 4: 35-41; Luke 8: 22-25. 


The curious “multitudes” “to whom He had all that 
morning spoken in parables” (Edersheim) gathered about 
Him again. Evidently Jesus knew that further instruction 
to them was unnecessary for the very reason that His former 
efforts had been futile so far as conveying to them His 
message. So ‘when even was come, he saith unto his dis- 
ciples, Let us go over unto the other side’ (Mark 4:35). 

The Jews spoke of two evenings, “the first evening,” or 
the time when the sun was declining in the heavens, and 
“the second evening” when the sun had actually set. From 
the fact that “other boats” accompanied “the boat” in which 


190 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Jesus travelled, Edersheim argues that the little flotilla must 
have sailed from the west shore of the Sea of Galilee, in 
“the first evening” or “afternoon.” This would have en- 
abled the party to cross the sea, a distance of not over six 
miles, long enough before dark to have enabled Jesus to 
cast the demons out that day. 

Storms have occurred on lakes before and since this great 
tempest swept down upon the calm Sea of Galilee, but never 
did any other storm meet with such commanding resistance 
as this one met at the hands of Him who has power over 
wind and wave. 

Wearied with a day of arduous teaching, and so able to 
sleep anywhere, Jesus slept in the stern of the boat. All was 
confusion on the boat. The company was in consternation, / 
but Jesus slept. We cannot imagine the Son of God per= 
turbed under any condition. Greater storms faced Him. 
His serenity here is but characteristic of Him and indicative 
of His tranquil, victorious spirit in the midst of the storms 
of this world. 

Though Jesus slept, yet the sea raged. The verse, “And 
behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that 
the boat was covered with the waves,” reminds me of the 
second stanza of “The Last Hymn” by Marianne Farming- 


ham. 
“But they looked across the water, 
And a storm was raging there; 
A fierce spirit moved above them— 
The wild spirit of the air. 
And it lashed, and shook, and tore them, 
Till they thundered, groaned, and boomed, 
And alas for any vessel 
In their yawning gulfs entombed.” 


Was the “Prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2) 
exerting his forces over wind and wave to destroy the Son 
of God? If so, he was doomed to disappointment, for 
“They came to him and awoke him.” ‘Their excitement 
directed His attention to the danger. These men realized 
how powerless they were in the face of “nature.” All they 
could do to save themselves was to call upon Him who can 
control any storm-tossed sea. Man, taken unawares, can- 
not successfully cope with the forces of nature. Floods 
rush on carrying cities to death and destruction; volcanoes 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 191 


entomb populations; the habitations of man are tossed by 
tornadoes and cyclones as butterflies are blown by a summer 
breeze. Helpless man calls on God. In times of great 
danger prayer operates as an instinct. 

Observe how the Synoptics relate the incident. Matthew, 
who aims to depict Christ as the King of the Jews, notes 
that they call on Him to “save” them. He is their only 
safety. Moreover, they address Him as “Lord.” This is a 
term of respect and reverence. As the Jews read Matthew’s 
Gospel, they were impressed that even in the excitement of 
the disciples, there was a due regard for Christ’s lordship 
over them. 

Mark pictures them as awaking Him and saying, “Teach- 
er, carest thou not that we perish?” He who came not to 
be ministered unto but to minister as a “servant of all” 
(Mk. 10: 44, 45), surely could help them in their distress. 
And then it was hardly fitting that He should be “asleep on 
the cushion’ while the others were battling with the storm, 
especially since He was a Servant, faithful and true. 

Luke’s panic-stricken appeal, “Master, Master, we perish,” 
carries with it an appeal to one in authority (ones. tr: 
Since Luke pictured Jesus as “Son of man,” seeking and 
saving the lost anywhere, it is appropriate that he should see 
the helpless group appealing to Him, who had “all au- 
thority.” 

Christ was so fearless, He naturally asked His terrified 
disciples, ‘“Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?’ His 
rebuke to the wind and the sea produced “a great calm.” 
So it ever has been, is, and will be: 


“Whether the wrath of the storm-tossed sea, 
Or demons, or men, or whatever it be, 

No water can swallow the ship where ‘lies 
The Master of ocean, and earth, and skies. 
They all shall sweetly obey Thy will, 

‘Peace be still! Peace be still!’ ” 


Then those who had feared marvelled at His matchless 
power, and those who had counted on His valuable assist- 
ance “feared exceedingly” in His presence, because “even 
the wind and the sea obey Him.” Their great surprise at 
Christ’s power over nature argues that they did not as yet 


192 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


recognize His deity. As one has said, He wanted this to 
be a matter of discovery rather than dogma. 


§ 59. The Gadarene Demoniacs. Mat. 8: 28-34; Mark 
5: 1-20; Luke 8: 26-39. 


The Parables showed Jesus’ supernatural wisdom as a 
Teacher. ‘The stilling of the tempest showed His power 
over nature; and this case of casting out demons evinced 
His power over evil spirits. 

The Jews thought of “a spirit world at war with God.” 
“God . . . is confronted by powers of evil, not scattered 
and desultory, but organized, ruled, and guided, well drilled, 
well led, and not unaware of God’s designs. Again and 
again, through traitors in God’s kingdom, they got wind of 
the plans of God and anticipated them, defeated them where 
they could, and fought a war of cunning and skill against 
God.”—T. R. Glover. 

For some today “the whole universe is full of demon 
powers, more real than we can imagine. In an Indian 
temple I have seen women undergoing the process of having 
devils driven out of them. I have seen men of education 
bowing in these temples to avert the anger of such spirits. 
To the stranger from the West, with his modern science, 
they are nothing. To the ancient world they are more real 
than men and women on the streets . . . The later Greek 
philosophers explained through demons the origin of evil, 
all the mystery and all the trouble of the world, and also the 
otherwise inexplicable gulf between the ultimate but un- 
knowable One God and man; demons in the air, man on 
earth . . . The Jew and the Christian were monotheists, 
but they too believed in the existence of demons; they 
were face to face with this awful reality of the daemon 
world at war with God. Paul, it is quite clear, shared that 
belief, though he did not give to it the importance that other 
men gave. Into that war, however, according to Paul, came 
a new force—the Son of God, the Lord of Glory. He 
battled with the powers of evil, and the battle went strangely, 
and they trapped Him. Pilate and Herod were mere tools 
in the hands of these demon powers, and they captured the 
Son of God (1 Cor. 2:8) . . . So far from defeating 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 193 


God’s purpose . . . they had only played into the hands of 
God. For the defeat of Christ on the Cross led to the 
Resurrection, to the triumph of God over demon powers, 
to captor made captive, death conquered, man set free,” etc. 
—Glover. 

Even though Satan and demons were glad to see Christ 
crucified, yet they could never have accomplished this had 
He not “given up the Ghost.” He laid down His life volun- 
tarily. 

As the chapter on ‘‘Devil Possession” from “Is the Devil 
a Myth,” by C. F. Wimberly, shows that Satan is adaptable 
and changes his tactics, to suit occasions we recommend it 
(pp. 118-123). 

The fact that this demoniac and his less important com- 
panion approached Jesus as soon as He landed on the east 
shore of the Sea of Galilee indicates an interest. What 
could have been the reason for the approach of this demon- 
ized one to the Son of God? Possibly enough imdividualism 
was left in the man for him to draw near to Christ as a last 
resort to deliverance from the pack of demons infesting 
him. Surely his was a sad plight. He was unclad, un- 
housed and unsubmissive. He terrorized the community 
with his unsightly nude and lacerated appearance and his 
hellish shrieks. He could not be confined. 

Coming into Jesus’ presence, he “fell down before him”’ 
and with a loud voice said, ““What have I to do with thee, 
Jesus, thou Son of the Most High God?” We observe that 
the demons recognized Jesus. They were sure He was “Son 
of the Most High God.” On this point Edersheim says, 
“As always also, the demons knew Jesus, and His presence 
seemed to constrain their confession of themselves—and 
therefore of Him . . . In some measure it is the same 
still. ‘Ihe introduction of grace brings to light and ex- 
perience sin hitherto unknown, and the new light brings 
consciousness of, and provokes contest with evil within, of 
which the very existence had previously been unsuspected. 
In the present instance the immediate effect was homage 
which presently manifested itself in language such as might 
have been expected . . . Self-confession of the demons 


. made the man fall down.” 
13 


194 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“What have I to do with thee?” signifies “What have we 
in common?” 

The answer of the demoniac to Christ’s question, ‘“What 
is thy name?” “My name is Legion, for we are many” 
is expressive of dual consciousness. 

Interesting it is that these demons wanted to stay in that 
country. Hence they entered the swine not by Jesus’ ar- 
rangement. He did not actually hinder their entering the 
swine, but neither did he provide for it. He “gave leave.” 
He said “Go.” Hence He could not be held morally re- 
sponsible for the loss of the hogs. ‘The fact that the demons 
were in “choked” or “drowned” swine enabled them, of 
course, to stay in the country, if they chose, because the 
owners would hardly fish the extinct porkers from the lake. 

The swine herders ran to their employers with the story. 
When these came, they saw the formerly demonized one 
“sitting clothed, and in his right mind.” ‘Then they feared. 
And instead of honoring Christ, they sent Him out of their 
coasts. They preferred hogs to boys and men. ‘They could 
not tolerate one whose power was at least indirectly con- 
nected with the loss of their business. Business first; boys 
second. Even Christ must go if He hurt business. It was a 
case of God and Mammon, they chose Mammon. 

But Jesus would not take the one dispossessed of the 
devils with Him. He left him there as a witness, as a 
“marvel.” 


§ 60. The Raising of Jairus’ Daughter. Mat. 9:1, 18- 
26; Mark 5: 21-43; Luke 8: 40-56. 


The commercial spirit of the Gadarenes compelled Jesus 
to return to the west coast of the Sea of Galilee where a 
multitude met Him. The waiting crowd ‘welcomed Him.” 
He was famous. The marvels associated with Him arrested 
the attention of all. Most of those comprising the multitude 
were simply curious, but in their midst was one, Jairus, a 
“ruler of the synagogue,” who came to Christ very humbly. 
“He fell down at Jesus’ feet.” About this man there was 
an urgency, for he realized his little daughter was “at the 
point of death.” Certainly this noted Rabbi saw in Jesus 
his only hope of health for his daughter. 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 195 


The Master, ever ready to aid in a time of need, followed 
Jairus to help him. His disciples accompanied Him. As 
Jesus pushed His way through the curious crowd “a woman 
who had an issue of blood twelve years, came behind Him 
and touched the border of his garment.’”’ When she was 
healed, and Jesus recognized that virtue had gone out of 
Himself, He attributed her healing entirely to her faith. 
Note this faith that Christ commended : 


a. It combated a disease of long standing—twelve years. 

b. It. was more potent than all attempts made by the 
woman to be cured previously. Mark says that she 
“had suffered many things of many physicians and 
had spent all that she had and was nothing better, 
but rather grew worse.” 


Dr. Vincent in commenting on the word “suffered” gives 
“the medical prescription for the treatment of such com- 
plaint given in the Talmud. I copy it. “Take of the gum 
of Alexandria the weight of a zuzee (a fractional silver 
coin); of alum the same; of crocus the same. Let them be 
bruised together and given in wine to the woman that has 
an issue of blood. If this does not benefit, take of Persian 
onions three togs (pints); boil them in wine, and give her 
to drink, and say ‘Arise from thy flux.’ If this does not 
cure her, set her in a place where two ways meet, and let 
her hold a cup of wine in her right hand, and let some one 
come behind and frighten her and say, ‘Arise from thy 
flux.’ But if that do not good, take a handful of cumin, a 
handful of crocus and a handful of fenugreek. Let these 
be boiled in wine and give them to her to drink, and say, 
‘Arise from thy flux.’”’ If these do no good, other doses, 
over ten in number, are prescribed, among them this: ‘Let 
them dig seven ditches, in which let them burn some cut- 
tings of vines, not yet four years old. Let her take in her 
hand a cup of wine, and let them lead her away from this 
ditch, and make her sit down over that. And let them re- 
move her from that and make her sit down over another, 
saying to her at each remove, ‘Arise from thy flux.’ ” 


Surely the above suggests what may be meant by “Had 
suffered many things.” 


196 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


c. It was her one resource. Her money was gone, so she 
came to Him who gives “without money and with- 
out price.” 

d. Her faith craved contact with Christ. Said she, “If I 
touch but His garments, I shall be made whole.” 

e. Then she “crowded” to Christ. 


(a) Pushing through the throng. 
(b) Struggling on in spite of her own weakness. 
(c) Suppressing any doubts that might arise. 


If we observe this woman in these respects, she becomes 
to us an example. When we would “get to Christ” we 
realize “folks” may and usually do hinder; then we are 
handicapped by our very selves, what we have been. ‘This 
business of approaching Christ is a new thing to us. Our 
own doubts will combat our faith, 


f. Her faith operated effectively. “She felt in her body 
she was healed of her plague.” 

g. Hence hers was a commendable faith (Mk. 5:34). 
It is possible that this modest but believing woman 
would have slipped through the “‘jam’’ unobserved, 
had Jesus not “perceived” that “power from him 
had gone forth.” 


Power over Nature, expressing itself in the elements, He 
had. Casting out of the demons showed Him to have Power 
over demons; so this miracle of healing showed Him to 
have Power over Disease. 

As the Master was commending the woman for her faith, 
certain ones rushed from the home of Jairus bidding him 
not to trouble the “Teacher” since his daughter was dead. 
But Jesus’ message to the ruler of the synagogue was “Fear 
_ not, only believe.” Then Jesus, in spite of the death dirges 
of the flute players, the tumult of the mourners, and the 
scornful jeers of the unbelievers, took with Him Peter, 
James, John and the father and mother of the girl and, 
going into the death-chamber, regarded death as but a sleep 
for said He to her, “Talitha cumi.” ‘Then at once the 
damsel arose and walked. 

This case which seemed impossible to ignorant doubt was 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 197 


easy for Christ, God’s Son. This scene reveals to us our 
masterful Lord and Saviour. He “charged” them not to 
tell. He commanded them to give the damsel food. It was 
“right” that He should “rule.” Difficult situations but gave 
Him opportunity to display His power. 
Of the stilling the tempest one has written: 
“He never would have been the same on land 
As where winds died at His command.” 
Death’s presence only provoked Christ’s power. 


§ 61. The Two Blind Men and the Dumb Demons. 
Mat. 9: 27-34. 


The two blind men without encouragement followed 
Flim, crying. Theirs was the eagerness. Just as the wom- 
an with the issue of blood and Jairus sought out Christ so 
these blind men pursued Him. Though Christ was a stone 
“set at nought by the builders,” the religious leaders of His 
day, yet the common people pressed upon Him curiously 
and often, as here, entreatingly. These poor unfortunates 
feeling their way through life’s darkness surely followed a 
heaven-born instinct when they followed “The light of the 
world.” For He was and is and will be the real Light, the 
Sun of righteousness. ‘I'he Church, as the moon, shines only 
with reflected light. 

Their cry for “mercy” indicated their consciousness of 
their plight. They felt sure of the pity of Him who “weeps” 
at Lazarus’ grave. His heart is ever touched with the in- 
firmities of the race of men since He was man. 

Their addressing Him as “Son of David” indicated their 
faith in His power. In response to their faith “touched he 
their eyes . . . and their eyes were opened.” 

The fact that these men disregarded or disobeyed His 
charge of silence and spread abroad His fame was only 
natural. How could men who had been blind, but who re- 
ceived their sight, keep quiet about it? Jesus’ charge 
amounted to His not encouraging others to advertise Him. 
His was a modest though at times a popular ministry. As 
one has said He desired the fact that He was God in the 
flesh to be a matter of discovery rather than a matter of 
dogma. 


198 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Following the opening of the eyes of the two blind men 
a dumb demon was cast out of one brought to Jesus. The 
results of this miracle are interesting as seen in the man, 
the multitude and the ministers of religion. 


(a) The man, erstwhile dumb, spake. 

(b) The multitude marvelled, saying, “It was never so 
seen in Israel.” 

(c) The ministers of religion, the Pharisees, tried to ex- 
plain the whole thing away by attributing Christ's 
power to cast out demons to the prince of demons. 


The fact that one hitherto silent should speak arrested the 
attention of the multitudes, who magnified Christ’s work 
above anything else in Israel’s history. This comparison of 
Christ with the past suggested an invidious contrast and 
stirred the Pharisees to attempt to account for His power 
and to associate it with Satan. 

The mind is so constructed that men “admit” or “reject.” 
When they admit they take up with, when they reject they 
explain away. 


§ 62. Second Rejection at Nazareth. Mat. 13: 54-58; 
Mark 6: 1-6; Luke 4: 16-30. 


Certain alliterative words suggest themselves as I study 
the incidents in connection with Christ’s second rejection in 
His boyhood city, Nazareth. These will provide the frame 
work or outline of our considerations here. 


1. Our Lord’s faithfulness at home. “He taught them in 
their synagogues.” It is just a little easier to keep silent in 
one’s own community. Both modesty and wisdom dictate 
the inadvisability of any show of pretentiousness at one’s 
home. Yet our Lord, by examples, served upon us the 
notice that we must be faithful at home. One’s Nazareth, 
the place where he was brought up, may be his Jerusalem, 
where he is to “begin.” If we are just as sure of our 
message as Jesus was of His it will be less difficult to open 
the Book to our kinsfolk and acquaintances. 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 199 


2. His effectiveness. 


They were astonished and said, Whence hath this man 
this wisdom and these mighty works?” (Mat. 13: 54). 

Jesus succeeded in arresting their attention. They saw 
the facts of His life but they could not account for these. 
They did not get the meaning of the phenomena, yet they 
perceived there was some force back of Christ’s words and 
works that they had not discovered. The long-distance view 
of Him simply aroused their curiosity. He was yet to be 
“discovered” to them. 


3. The futility of His message. 


“They were offended in Him.” They stumbled over Him. 
To them He was “‘the carpenter, the son of Mary and broth- 
er of James and Joses, and Judas and Simon.” With Him 
they were familiar and then as now “Familiarity breeds con- 
tempt.” Had His words come from some one from a dis- 
tance they would have not simply been heard but heeded. 
Measured by themselves His words and works were quite 
unusual, extraordinary, but the more they thought of their 
carpenter-neighbor the more convinced were they that He 
could not be the source of sucha stream. Jesus of Nazareth, 
thought they, could be no fountain of weighty words and 
mighty deeds, so “they stumbled.” And it was even as Paul 
wrote. He was “unto the Jews a stumbling-block” (1 Cor. 
Lies): 


4. The philosophy of Christ. 


As if to rescue them from their own provincial, narrow 
bigotry and near-sighted jealousy, as well as to reconcile 
His own heart, our Lord and Master, with appropriate per- 
spective, picked up a great truth and held it before their 
myopic eyes when He from His eminence of magnanimity 
uttered “A prophet is not without honor, save in his own 
country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.”’ 

This fact was comfort to Him. It should have been 
startling to them. In the same breath that He explained 
and from one point of view excused their rejection of Him- 
self, He also accused them of a failure to recognize their 


200 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


prophet. History was repeating itself. Another prophet 
was being received “abroad” but rejected at home. But this 
Prophet is great enough to turn the searchlight of history 
onto the page of their own problem and make them respon- 
sible for their conduct. Was Moses rejected by Egypt, 
Filijah by Israel, Jeremiah by Jerusalem and Socrates by 
Greece? Yes, each was despised by the people of whom he 
was the benefactor. But if the Nazarenes had not been so 
provincial they would have read the tragedies of the peoples 
who rejected their prophets. But alas and alack, history 
again repeats itself and Nazareth that should have known of 
Christ’s unique character- refused to allow Him as a suffi- 
cient cause for what they saw transpire as if through Him. 
They argued and deceived their own hearts. Prejudiced 
intellect assumed the prerogative of final judge and con- 
demned Christ as a, fabricator or an impostor. 


5. The Fewness of His Works. Mat. 13:58; Mk. 6:5. 


The hands of Christ were tied by unbelief. One would 
naturally think that in Nazareth, His home, faith in Him 
would have been abundant. But evidently Nazareth, as 
Eidersheim says, proudly claimed Him as her son when re- 
ports of His power came to her but then she did not recog- 
nize His deity and so misinterpreted Him. Had she ac- 
cepted Him as divine then His whole life would have been 
intelligible. Drummond in his ‘Faith’s Perplexities,” has 
a chapter on the “Credulity of Unbelief.” His point is that 
the unbelievers ridicule the credulity of Christian believers. 
Yet these same unbelievers are gullible so that they accept 
what is really untenable. In referring to the tendency of 
unbelief to “laugh out of court” all not suited to its fancy 
he says that Beethoven’s stringed quartette would be said 
to scrape horses’ tails over cats’ bowels. Luke 4: 23-27 
elaborates on the fact that the fewness of Christ’s works 
was attributable to Nazareth’s irresponsiveness. 

6. The Fury of Antagonism. Luke 4: 28. 

They would have dashed Him over the precipice had He 
not eluded them. 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 201 


§ 63. Third Preaching Tour Continued. Mat. 9:35; 
Mark 6: 6b. 


Though spurned in His own village yet He went to other 
villages teaching and healing. 


§ 64, The Mission of the Twelve. Mat. 9: 36-11:1; 
Mark 6: 7-13; Luke 9: 1-6. } 


By “mission” here I mean “delegation” or “‘sent ones.” 
1. The Need of the Mission — Multitudes shepherdless 
(Mat. 9:26). . 
2. The effective cause of the Mission. 
a. Christ’s compassion (9: 36). 
De eraverato to \s 
3. The Mission. 

a. Its personnel (16:2-4). “The twelve.” 

b. Its Power (10:1). Not simply “dynamic” but 
“authority.” They had not so much “ability” as 
God-given “right” to execute. 

c. Its Program. 


(a) Negatively stated (Mat. 10:5b). Mat- 
thew interested in declaring Christ’s King- 
dom and announcing Him as King of the 
Jews alone relates this point. 

(b) Positively stated. 

(1) Proclamation (Mat. 10:7). They 
were to “preach.” 

(2) Purgation (Mat. 10:8). “Cleans- 
ing,’ “healing” and “casting out” 
was to be their work. 

(3) Preparation (Mat. 10:9, 10). 
Equipment or “outfit” was very 
limited. 

(4) Particularizing (10: 11-15). These 
messengers were to be impartial, 
yet they were to select the re- 
sponsive and reject the irrespon- 
Sive. 


202 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


d. Its Perils (Mat. 10: 16-23). “Sheep” are in 
danger when “wolves” are about. But these were 
“wolves” of a higher type; they were “men.” 

. Its Protector (Mat. 10: 29 and context). He that 
notes the fall of a sparrow will surely care for 
His own. 

f. Its Partitioning message (10:34-39). Those 
not for Christ and open for His message are 
against Him. 

g. Its Preciousness (10:40). The apostles were in 
Christ’s stead. Hence their reception meant that 
He was received. It behooved men to properly 
value the Gospel messenger. So it is ever as Paul 
quoted from Isaiah, ‘“How beautiful are the feet 
of them that preach the gospel of peace and bring 
glad tidings of good things’ (Rom. 10: 15b). 


§ 65. Death of John the Baptist. Mat. 14: 1-12; Mark 
6: 14-29; Luke 9: 7-9, 


Introduction: Note the question of fasting (Mat. 9: 14- 
17). Christ’s presence marked the “wedding-week” during 
which time “children of the bride-chamber” were exempt 
from fasting. Christ’s going away from them would neces- 
sitate fasting. Verses 16 and 17 indicate the irrelevancy of 
fasting, the incongruity of putting Christ’s new patch on the 
old threadbare garment of Pharisaism. “Christ is not 
merely a reformation; all things must become new.” New 
wine of the kingdom would break old forms. 

Note John’s question sent from prison (Mat. 11: 2-14). 
Imagine doubts in such a one as John had been. Says Eder- 
sheim, “Not Paul, when forsaken of all, he lay in the 
dungeon, the aged prisoner of Christ; not Huss, when alone 
at Constance he encountered the whole Catholic Council and 
the flames; only He, the God-man, over whose soul crept 
the death coldness of great agony, when, one by one, all 
light of God and man seemed to fade out, and only that one 
remained burning — His own faith in the Father — could 
have experienced bitterness like this.” The fact of this 
record proves the narrative was no invention—“Evidential 
force of this narrative seems irresistible.” Does our doubt 


oO 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 203 


lead us to Christ? Why ask a false Christ? Faith must 
have preceded the question. 

Jesus points out His works (v. 5). Then He eulogizes 
John (W. 7, 8, 11), who had fallen victim to Herod’s wrath 
for prophesying against his marriage. 


Herop’s FEast 


At Herod’s feast, after all guests were satiated with 
food, then a “‘sensuous stimulus” in the form of a “dubious 
dance” was introduced. The daughter of the degenerate 
Herodias, “wretched offspring of the once noble Macca- 
bees,” did the dance. The king, pleased by it, gave her the 
head of John the Baptist on a platter. Herodias had been 
married to her half uncle, Herod Philip, son of Herod the 
Great. When Herod Philip, through his father’s will, was 
deprived of the throne, his ambitious wife willingly con- 
spired with her husband’s half brother, Herod Antipas, to 
become his wife. Herod Antipas repudiated his wife and 
married Herodias. Herodias was “the curse and ruin” of 
Antipas. 

The murder of John the Baptist horrified the people. 
Herod was worsted in a war with Aretas, father of his 
former wife. Incited by his wife, he went to Rome to be 
made a king, but was instead banished to Gaul. But 
Herodias was faithful to Herod Antipas, though given 
favors by the Emperor. As for Salome, she was married 
to her uncle, Philip the Tetrach. Legend says her death 
was retributive; i. e., it was the result of a fall on the ice. 

With reverential silence we contemplate why God per- 
mitted John to first languish in prison and then come to such 
an untimely death at the hands of a Jezebel, but we know 
Jehovah reigneth. 


§ 66. The Feeding of the Five Thousand. Mat. 14: 
13-23; Mark 6: 30-46; Luke 9: 10-17; John 16: 
1-15. 


Christ leaves Capernaum because 

1. Danger of uprising after John’s death. 

2. 'To temporarily withdraw from the power of Herod. 
3. Need of rest. (Mk. 6:31.) 


204 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Christ arrives at Bethsaida on the east shore. Multitudes 
follow. (Mk. 6:33; Luke 9: 10.) They were: 


Religious—‘‘Passover Pilgrims.’”’—Edersheim, 
Christ’s “compassion” for multitude. 
Leaderless—“As sheep not having a shepherd.” (Mk. 6: 
34). 
He taught them. Mk. 6: 34b. 
He would feed them. Mk. 6: 35-37. 
His disciples saw the impossibility of this 
amount. 
Hungry—Always a problem to “feed spiritually.” 
Christ’s plan—Sit down—“order.” Mk. 6: 
39; Jno. 6:10. : 
Christ’s provision—5 loaves, 2 fishes. 
Christ’s prayer and posture—“looking up 
to heaven” “gave thanks.” Mk. 6:41; 
John 6: 5. 
Christ’s plenty—“All did eat and were 
filled.” Mk. 6: 42.—Fragments, 


§67. Jesus Walking on the Water. Mat. 14: 24-36; 
Mark 6: 47-56; Jno. 6: 16-21. 


After Jesus had fed the “5,000 men” the people, because 
of “the sign which he did” pronounced Him “the prophet 
that cometh into the world.” ‘Then Jesus realized that 
they were about to take Him by force and make Him 
king (Jno. 6:14, 15). ‘This led Him to constrain the 
disciples to take a boat over the Sea of Galilee. Probably 
He knew it was wise to have the disciples leave the scene 
of His popularity. Then. He sent the multitude away, a 
full crowd so far as their stomachs were concerned, yet a 
disappointed lot because He would not yield to their en- 
treaties to be king. 

Then He goes to the mountain to pray. What a prayer 
that must have been! We imagine He prayed for the fickle 
multitude, for the disciples, for grace to stand popularity 
as well as persecution. For Jesus just could not afford to 
be influenced by popular sentiment. He must be the same 
ever. Christ on the mountain alone in prayer could see the 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 205 


distress of the boat in which His faithful followers were 
rowing against a contrary wind. The friendly full moon 
of Passover season disclosed the sea to Him even at night. 
That boat was His charge; in it were those who were to 
comprise His Church. He would not rest while they 
were in danger, so, though it were 3 a. m., He went down to 
their relief instead of resting, for their oars were powerless 
against the storm, just as our mightiest efforts are too feeble 
to overcome difficulties that block our progress. He alone 
can help us out of our troubles. 


But when He neared them, they were affrighted. ‘They 
took Him for a “ghost.” Evidently they were not pre- 
pared for a miracle. But He quiets their fears with a re- 
assuring word, “Be of good cheer, it is I, be not afraid.” 


He at that time would not be recognized as a “king” yet 
Fle assured them that in a higher sense, in another sphere, 
He was verily King. Well was it that the disciples learned 


all these lessons, which they doubtless treasured and later 
used, 


But Peter, spurred on by an impulsive hope,—or a pre- 
sumptuous faith—asked Jesus to bid him go to Him on the 
water if He were the Lord. Jesus, apparently desiring to 
meet Peter’s faith, such as he had, transformed that pre- 
sumption into real faith and bade Peter “Come.” But 
Peter saw the work of the wind and began to sink until 
Jesus took his hand and with a mild rebuke gave him a 
sure footing and a safe place in the boat. So Jesus though 
He rebukes, yet He assists. Our feeble efforts merit His 
rebuke, yet He ever is ready to save us. We need not fear 
of perishing, however futile is our effort, so long as we 
sincerely press to Him. 


The next day finds Jesus as busy as ever in His ministry 
of healing. But here we should not fail to notice that 
those in the boat worshipped Him when He saved them, 
drew the sinking Peter out of the water, and, no less marvel, 
had walked on the water Himself. Christ surely does 
seem more worthy of worship and praise when He has bene- 
fited us; yet He is ever the same and always is deserving 
of our truest devotion. 


206 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 68. Discourse on the Bread of Life. John 6: 22-71. 


a 


eager to know when He had come hither. Jesus frankly 
told them that their chief interest was in the “loaves.” 
Then He gave them a discourse on “the meat, which abideth 
_ unto eternal life, which the Son of man shall give unto you.” 
But their craving for the “loaves” led them to suggest to 
Him that He provide them with a “sign” similar to the 
one Moses furnished in the wilderness when daily food in 
the form of manna was provided. But Jesus kept calling 
their attention to “the true bread out of heaven.” When 
they called for that bread, He responded with “I am the 
bread of life; he that cometh to me shall not hunger, and 
he that believeth on me shall never thirst.” 


In spite of the murmuring of the Jews against His con- 
tention that He came down from heaven (Jno. 6:41—) 
Jesus kept insisting, “I am the bread of life.” They saw 
Him as Joseph’s son in spite of His miraculous power, 
but Jesus insisted that they must eat of His flesh and drink 
of His blood to have eternal life. He stated that partaking 
of Him was necessary to communion (Jno. 6:56). Evi- 
dently Jesus, when He referred to eating His flesh and 
drinking His blood, had in mind that the believer must by 
faith appropriate the work of Calvary where His body 
was mutilated and His blood shed. ‘Then when we par- 
take of the loaf and the wine of communion, we “show 
forth the Lord’s death till he come.” When Paul instructed 
the Corinthians as to communion, he said that “some were 
weak and sickly” in their midst, and some “slept” because 
they failed to “discern the Lord’s body.” 

Calvary’s work matters. Christ’s death not only opened 
a way to God for man, but made possible that blessed com- 
panionship or fellowship of which John writes (1 Jno. 1: 
3 


Even the disciples stumbled at Jesus’ words concerning 
His flesh being the Bread of which the believer must par- 
take. Then He told them that “It is the spirit that quick- 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 207 


eneth; the flesh profiteth nothing.” Many disciples left 
Him, but the twelve remained with Him. ‘The Master’s 
question, “Would ye also go away?” provoked Peter’s frank 
“Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of 
eternal life.’”’ Peter assured Christ that the twelve believed 
and knew that Jesus was “the Holy One of God.” But 
Jesus, knowing better than Peter, declared, “Did not I 
choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” Ah, the 
sifting was on. The multitude followed for the loaves 
and fishes; the outer circle of disciples left Him when 
they could not understand Him; Judas was due to betray 
Him. We shall with interest follow the eleven as Christ 
comes up to and passes through the Passion Week. 

Need I ask these questions? Has our religion or Chris- 
tianity a physical basis only; i. e., do we care more for 
Christ's blessing than for Christ Himself? Or do we go 
with Him only as far as we can understand Him as do 
modernists? Or do we, like Peter, cleave to Him as the 
Only One who has eternal-life words? 


§ 69. Discourse On Eating With Unwashen Hands. 
Mat. 15: 1-20; Mark 7: 1-23. 


These Pharisees and scribes from Jerusalem raised the 
question of Jewish traditionalism, citing as an instance of 
infraction the fact that Jesus’ disciples ate with unwashen 
hands. On this point “the tradition of the elders” was 
very strict. The Pharisees charged Jesus with “not being 
of God” and being “a sinner.” So eager were they to 
make good their charge that they grabbed at any straw of 
supposed evidence against Him. Hence they blamed Jesus 
for allowing His disciples to eat with “unwashen” or “com- 
mon hands.” 

To observe washings had, as some held, scriptural support. 
See Lev. 15:11. Its observance had exceptions. But that 
it must be done was strongly urged by the Mishna. De- 
filed hands might render the whole body unclean. Consider 
one curious application of the idea of the defilement of 
hands. “The roll of the Pentateuch in the temple defiled 
all kinds of meat that touched it,” according to a decree. 
This was based on the fact that the Terumah (preserved 


208 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


first-fruits) kept close to the Roll of the Law caused the 
latter to be injured by mice. The Rabbinic ordinance was 
intended to avert this danger and so preserve the Roll. 
(Note: Really the fruit caused the destruction of the Roll, 
yet knowing the force of the religious decree, the Roll was 
said to defile the fruit or meat.) To increase the pre- 
caution, it was decreed that all that rendered the Terumah 
unfit also defiles the hands. Hence the Holy Scriptures de- 
file not only the food but the hands that touched them, and 
Holy Scriptures included all inspired writings, Law, Proph- 
ets and Hagiograph hyd ae Dae Even smallest portion of 
Scripture would “defile the hands.” Consider then that the 
disciples had been neglecting a rite considered very im- 
portant by the scribes. 

Later the Pharisees evaded this rite, however, by invent- 
ing what we would term the Popish principle of intention; 
he ae Bl any one had performed the handwashing in the 
morning ‘‘with intention” it would apply to the whole day! 

Buta Y special decree had gone out just before Christ which 
was carried into force in the very days of Christ. Hence 
the zeal of the scribes. (A new “rule.” ‘‘Prohibition” is 
just in force.) Orthodox Jews had many other observances 
which they had “received to hold;” e. g., any contact with a 
heathen, even to touch his dress, made it necessary for the 
Jew to immerse himself. Vessels having contracted im- 
purity were to be broken if earthen; immersed, if wood, 
horn, glass, or brass, ete. 

We see herein Christ’s attitude toward traditionalism in 
that He neither vindicated their conduct nor apologized for 
their breach of Rabbinic ordinances. When the scribes 
charged them, He was indifferent. This was quite notice- 
able when we learn that ordinances of the scribes were de- 
clared more precious and of more binding importance than 
Holy Scripture itself. 

Edersheim calls our attention as to why Christ provoked 
such hostility by opposing what might have seemed indiffer- 
ent by showing us to what extremes Rabbinism went. It 
declared that God during the day studied the Scripture 
and at night the Mishnah. Anthropomorphism was carried 
to profanity. God is pictured as spending the last three 


SECOND PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY. 209 


hours of each day playing with the Leviathan. Since Jeru- 
salem was destroyed, He no longer laughs but weeps (Jer. 
13:17). Jer. 25:30 is said to mean that because of the 
destruction of the temple, God roars like a lion in each of 
three night watches. 

When Christ declared that they rejected God’s command- 
ment for tradition, He became pronouncedly antagonistic to 
traditionalism. This “hurt” because no traditional law 
was supposed to contradict the Scriptures. The ‘Ten 
Words,” or Commandments of the Decalogue, were “‘the 
Holy of Holies of the Law.” Honor to parents was an 
obligation most rigidly enforced. But Jesus cites an in- 
stance where a vow according to Rabbinism, may offset, 
and in practice did really offset, this commandment. 

The Mishna Tractate tells what expressions were equiv- 
alent to vows and what would either legally ‘invalidate or 
annul a vow, or leave it binding.” Many foolish vows 
were made and kept. Express words of vowing were not 
needed. Korban, “given to God,’ or Qonam, “let it be 
established,’ would suffice. If a thing laid on the altar were 
mentioned, that was a vow. In the second use of the word 
Korban, it meant “appropriated to self when another’s,”’ 
as was the case here. The Mishnah discussed whether 
“honour of father and mother,” constituted a ground for 
invalidating a vow, in regards to parents, and decided ‘“‘no” 
with one dissenting voice. 


14 





PART VI 
Third Period of the Galilean Ministry 


7 Ye 
a AM he! ' 
vai ees 


* 
J 
~ 


ae 
| ws Wi: 


>¥ 





THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 


§ 70. Syrophoenician Woman’s Daughter. (Mat. 15: 
21-28. Mark 7: 24-30.) 


Note that this woman, not an Israelite, fittingly, in lowli- 
est reverence, addressed Christ as “O Lord, Thou Son of 
David.” She used a Jewish name on Him. She thought of 
Him as “an Israelitish Messiah.” He refused her at first 
so that it might be clear that His works were not a mere 
demonstration of power. He did not mean to reject her, 
but only to refuse her as being “Lord, Son of David.” He 
healed her daughter as her “Lord.” She was one of the 
“little dogs under the table,” but since she was a little dog 
under her Master’s table, hers was the same, in kind, as 
that of the children, the Jews, though they sat around the 
table at whose head was the Master, or Lord. (Christ 
showed that He was first for the Jews, but also for the 
Gentiles, and what the former received, the latter also re- 
ceived, even though it be crumbs dropped from Jewish 
hands, as, for example, the Scriptures, Christ, etc. ) 

Failure to heal her daughter at once was hardly that He 
might first try her faith or that His healing of her was an 
“after-thought.” He had something to teach her. She 
saw it in Christ’s countenance, and said it. He was her 
Master and she had a right to “crumbs” from Him who 
was Lord of Jews and Gentiles. 

She was a daughter of Abraham, being of “faith.” 


§ 71. Return Through Decapolis; Many Miracles of 
Healing. (Mat. 15: 29-31; Mark 7: 31-37.) 


Following the healing of many, they bring unto Him one 
deaf and having an impediment in his speech. Note the 
“means” used in Mark 7:33 by Christ. 

Edersheim says, “This elaborate use of means would 
banish the idea of magic.”” Of course this means all eman- 

vA 


214 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


ated from the Person of Christ. It was His power ulti- 
mately. 


§ 72. The Feeding of the Four Thousand. (Mat. 15: 
32-38; Mark 8: 1-9.) 


There is nothing new in this miracle when it is com- 
pared with that of “Feeding of the Five Thousand,” ex- 
cept that we observe that Jesus had a peculiar compassion 
on the multitude, lest they should ‘faint in the way,” as 
they were homeward bound. 


§ 73. The Pharisees and Sadducees Demanding a Sign 
From Heaven. (Mat. 15: 39—16:12; Mark 8: 
10-21.) 


In answer to the demand for a sign, Jesus told them that 
no sign should be given them but that of the prophet Jonah. 
Now what could have been “the sign of Jonah,” if not the 
clear prophetic ring? Jonah spake with authority and 
Ninevah repented. The Pharisees and Sadducees were 
supposed to be religious “‘specialists” yet they better “knew 
how to discern the face of the heaven” than “‘the signs of 
the times.” They could write the weather “Probs,”’ (as 
Canadians say,) but could not prognosticate spiritually. 
They perceived probable weather conditions, but they were 
obtuse as to spiritual realities. 


Their major had been supplanted by things of time and 
sense. They were religious “quacks” and so could not dis- 
cern the value of Jesus’ message from His clear prophetic 
ring. Jesus had no “signs” for such as they. 


Following this incident, Jesus warned His disciples to 
“Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 
They supposed that He referred to their failure to take 
bread. The fact that they so felt is indicative that they 
realized that they had been remiss along this line. Possibly 
they saw that they were like the Pharisees and Sadducees, 
also coming to depend upon the signs. But Jesus warned 
them rather of the teaching of these Pharisees and Sad- 
ducees. That of the Pharisees was Externalism in matters 
of religion, and that of the Sadducees was Materialism. 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 215 


Pharisees were careful to tithe “‘mint, anise, and cumin,” 
garden vegetables, but they neglected “judgment, mercy, 
and faith.” They magnified the minor matters and minified, 
or rather, entirely neglected the major matters. And this 
they did because they were alive only to the external, in 
which realm lay the minor. They were misfits in things 
spiritual. They were color blind in the spiritual realm. 


The Sadducees believed in no spirits nor any resurrec- 
tion and so were Materialists. Jesus did not desire His 
disciples to be infected with their crass teaching. 


§ 74. The Blind Man Near Bethsaida. (Mark 8: 22-26.) 


Following the Master’s contact with the unbelief of the 
Pharisees and Sadducees and His expressed solicitations 
for the spiritual welfare of His disciples, lest they should 
become contaminated with the doubt of these two classes, 
we meet the case of this “blind man.’”’ Though blind in so 
far as his natural eyes were concerned, yet he had sufficient 
sight with his spiritual eyes to place himself at the disposal 
of Jesus, who, by stages, brought him to clearness of vision. 
Surely evidences of faith must have rejoiced Jesus’ heart. 

“The use of saliva was a well-known remedy for affec- 
tions of the eyes.” It was thus that Rabbi Meir relieved 
one of his fair hearers when her husband, in his anger at her 
long detention by the Rabbi’s sermons, had ordered her to 
spit in the preacher’s face. Pretending to suffer from his 
eyes, the Rabbi contrived that the woman publicly spat 
in his eyes, thus enabling her to obey her husband’s com- 
man.” The anecdote at least proves that the application 
of saliva was popularly regarded as a remedy for affections 
of the eyes.’—Edersheim. But saliva alone could not cure 
blindness. 


§ 75. Peter’s Confession. “High Point in Gospel 
History.” (Mat. 16: 13-20; Mark 8: 27-30; 
Luke 9: 18-21.) 


The time had come when the Master provoked an ex- 
pression of faith from His disciples. When Jesus had 


216 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


walked on the water, they had owned Him as “the Son of 
God,” but Edersheim states that even that term did not 
carry the meaning that is expressed in “Thou art the Christ, 
the Son of the living God.” 

Chrysostom said that Peter was “the mouth of the 
Apostles.” But what Peter here expresses had come to 
him as a revelation from the heavenly Father, rather than 
a conclusion reached by the apostolic group going into 
session and coming to an agreement. 

The importance of this confession may be gathered from 
Rom. 10:10. When we note that “With the mouth con- 
fession is made unto salvation,” we can approximate the 
value of Peter’s utterance. It has been noted that since 
Jesus’ reply to Peter is omitted by both Mark and Luke, 
that it is not so important as the Roman Catholics make it 
and, as Beza suggests, this omission weighs against the “per- 
manent supremacy of Peter.” Added to this is the stubborn 
fact that there is no solid evidence that Peter was ever Bishop 
of Rome. 

Evidently Jesus did not say that He would build His 
church upon Peter, but upon Peter’s Confession. Jesus, 
speaking in Aramaic, addressed him first as Simon, son of 
Jonah (Bar—son). This calls our attention to Peter’s 
natural weakness and hence his being ill-fitted to be the 
“chief corner-stone,’* ‘which truly was (Christ Himself. 

“The Church’s one foundation 
Is Jesus Christ our Lord.” 

Allowing for all the growth in grace evidenced by Peter’s 
epistles, as contrasted with his earlier conduct, yet we would 
feel insecure to have him, I say it reverently, as our “foun- 
dation.” Why not take Christ who walked on the sea while 
Peter sank? Certainly the exegesis of the passage warrants 
our believing that the church rests on Christ rather than 
Peter, as we shall soon see. Then, if Rome’s theory were 
correct, would not Peter’s successors have given a better 
account of themselves? What of the “Pornocracy?” ‘The 
theory sinks with its own weight of encumbrances. 

Now to the exegesis. Jesus did not say, “Thou art 
Peter [petros] and upon this Peter [petros] I will build 
my church,” but rather “Thou art Peter [petros] and upon 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 217 


this rock [petra] I will build my church.”’ Petros, masculine 
gender, is a stone, a detached rock. Petra, a feminine 
gender, is a chief, a base rock, “a living rock.’”’ Now Peter 
was of that Rock. He would have been unable to have made 
the Great Confession which was the “High Point in the 
Gospel History” had he not been of Christ the Rock, 
“smitten” for the thirsty multitudes, but one day to roll 
upon rebellious governments and grind them to powder. 
But he was not petra but petros, just Peter still and not a 
“sure foundation,” though not yet sand either and much less 
of the earth, earthy. As Edersheim so well translates this 
passage, we shall let his rendering be our last word on the 
exegesis—“Thou art Peter (Petros) and upon this Petra 
(The Petrine) will I build my Church.” Upon Peter’s 
confession the Church was to be built. 

Since Peter knew by revelation just who Jesus was, he 
was the proper one to receive the keys, symbols of author- 
ity, that would open the door into “I'he Room of Grace.” 
And John records “I am the door.” ‘This Door swings open 
to all who join with Peter in saying “Thou art the Christ, 
the Son of the living God.” Since Christ is the Door, we, 
by a simple step of faith, pass through Him into the 
Church, the assembly of saints, separated unto Him. 
“Bind” and “loose” were terms suited to the understand- 
ings of the disciples, trained in Judaism. ‘The Rabbis had 
a legislative function. ‘They not only emphasized laws of 
the Old Testament Scriptures, but they made many new 
ones as the ‘Talmud shows. ‘Thus they made by their legis- 
lation, certain acts to be lawful and others unlawful. Their 
action as a Rabbinic assembly was prohibitive as well as 
permissive in respect to the conduct of the Jews. When 
their laws prohibited, they “bound”; when they permitted 
any act they “loosed,” the one who comitted it. So, by the 
same principle, Peter, who had new light, could “bind” and 
“loose.” 

Then the Rabbis also had a judicial function and as judges 
they would “remit,” that is, free from blame, or “retain,” 
that is, hold one to pay a penalty. Now Christ apparently 
transferred these powers to Peter first and later to the other 


218 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


apostles and we believe through them to the Church. (Cf. 
John 20: 23.) 

So when you meet a sinner you authoritatively point out 
Christ, the Saviour, to him and point him to Christ. You 
quote to him the promise when he seeks salvation, you re- 
buke and charge him with sin and so condemn him. ‘There 
is a great danger of Protestantism minimizing the use of 
“the keys” simply because Romanism has abused their use. 


§ 76. Christ Foretells His Death and Resurrection. 
(Mat. 16: 21-28; Mark 8:34-9:1; Luke 9: 
22-27.) 


When Jesus first told of His coming passion, Peter took 
issue with Him. Peter could not bear the thought of 
Christ’s suffering, so he said, “Mercy be to Thee.” ‘The 
Jews used such an expression, but usually said it as follows, 
‘Mercy and peace to Thee.” ‘heir idea was to hope that 
God would avert the impending calamity. Peter wished 
for Jesus a smooth pathway, a calm sea, a painless life, 
rather than a painful, shameful death. ; 

Peter there erred in appealing to the human in Christ. 
Satan had done this when he tempted Christ. Jesus there- 
fore addressed Peter with the stern “Get thee behind me, 
Satan.” He pointed out that Peter had a human view- 
point. His advice was that Christ should please Himself, 
but this was contrary to the Master’s program and inten- 
tion for His sojourn on earth. 

Ah! how often do Christians wish for each other an 
“easy berth.” We dislike to see our dear ones being dis- 
ciplined. But let us recall that we are to follow in our 
Master’s footsteps. He travelled a rough road. (CEL 
Peter 4:1). Peter learned the lesson. 

But Peter’s seemingly inappropriate and untimely rebuke 
was utilized by Jesus as an opportunity to teach His fol- 
lowers that they would be called upon to “deny themselves.” 
There were crosses to be borne. Before them was not a 
Messianic Kingdom with its attendant glory, but the torture 
of their Roman masters. But He assured them that deny- 
ing self now and thus losing one’s life, would prepare for 
the finding of a larger life in His time and way. Then He 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 219 


did predict His own coming in glory attended by angels, 
when all matters would be adjudicated. His urge was for 
them to live patiently and “value the future.” 

Then followed that difficult prophecy that some there 
present would, ere death came, see “the Son of Man com- 
ing in His Kingdom.” Does this refer to the fall of Jeru- 
salem in 70 A. D., when the lurid flames, devouring the 
city and temple, would illuminate the Sign of the Cross 
and convince them that Jesus was indeed “King of the 
Jews?” 


§ 77. The Transfiguration. (Mat. 17: 1-13; Mark 9: 
2-13; Luke 9: 28-36.) 


Mountain and solitude scenes are quite prominent in Bible 
History. Here have been “solemn transactions.” 

(a) Abraham and Isaac on Mount Moriah. 

(b) Moses at the Burning Bush and on Mount Sinai. 

(c) Elijah alone on Horeb. 

(d) Elijah and Elisha at the former’s ascension. 

(e) And this occasion when Christ was alone with Peter, 
James and John. He took these three with Him— 
(1) Into Jairus’ home. 
(2) To the Mount of Transfiguration. 
(3) To Gethsemane. 


Jesus had gone up into the mountain to pray and He 
was “transfigured.” 

Moses the lawgiver and Elijah of the prophets were there 
present to testify to Peter, James and John of His genuine- 
ness. ‘These three have been likened to a column of which 
Moses, the law, was the base, Elijah, the prophets, the 
main shaft, and Christ the glorious apex, or cap-stone. 

A voice out of the cloud said, ‘“This is my beloved Son,” 
etc. It is little wonder that Peter and James and John 
“fell on their face, and were sore afraid” for they had seen 
Moses and Elijah and their glorified Master, besides hear- 
ing God’s voice. Surely, when they saw no one, save Jesus 
only, they would hold Him in higher esteem because of 
this celestial experience. The possible purposes of this 
transfiguration were: 


220 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


(a) For the disciples’ benefit in view of Peter’s remon- 
strance to His death, (See 2 Peter 1: 16-18 for 
impression made on Peter). 

(b) For Jesus’ strengthening, 

(c) And as an earnest of our own transformation. 


§ 78. The Demoniac Boy. (Mat. 17: 14-20; Mark 9: 
14-29; Luke 9: 37-43a.) 


What a contrast in this scene and that of the transfigura- 
tion! The disciples’ failure was evident. Their failure was 
entirely due to “‘faithlessness’”—unbelief and lack of spirit- 
ual faith. 

We are here reminded of the power of prayer which 
avails when dogma and formula fail. 


§ 79. Christ Again Foretells His Death and Resurrec- 
tion. (Mat. 71:22, 23; Mark 9:30-32; Luke 
9: 43-45.) 


Here we see the need of frequent repetition to impress 
the hearers or to clear the teacher at least. 


§ 80. The Shekel in the Fish’s Mouth. Mat. 17: 24-27. 


As this narrative plainly states, those that collected the 
taxes approached Peter as he came into Capernaum with 
the Master, asking if Jesus did not pay the half shekel, and 
Peter knowing the Lord’s attitude toward the taxes replied, 
“Yea.” Doubtless Peter remembered Jesus’ statement 
“render to Cesar the things that are Cesar’s.” ‘The amaze- 
ment of Peter must have been great when upon coming into 
the house Jesus said to him, “What thinkest thou, Simon? 
The kingdoms of the earth, from whom do they receive 
toll or tribute? From their sons or from strangers?’ When 
Peter replied, “From strangers,’ then Jesus remarked 
“therefore the sons are free.” This conversation between 
Christ and Peter bristles with suggestiveness. It seems 
evident that Jesus was taking this opportunity to teach Peter 
by means of a parable. He is saying that He is the Son 
of the Kingdom. Since His Father is the King of all 
realms, why should He pay toll or tribute? 


‘THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 22] 


After Jesus had had this conversation with Peter He in- 
structed him to catch the fish in whose mouth was the shekel 
with which Peter might pay the toll both for the Master 
and for himself. By His knowing of this coin in the mouth 
of the fish He evinces His deity and this must have im- 
pressed Peter with His divine nature. As I see the incident 
it was all for the purpose of teaching Peter; so here no 
doubt the Lord took infinite pains to instruct him who was 
to be the leader among the apostles. 


§ 81. Discourse on Humility and Forgiveness. Mat. 
18: 1-35; Mark 9: 33-50; Luke 9: 46-50. 


The first part of this section deals with the importance 
of childlikeness. The disciples were disputing as to who 
was the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Jesus’ answer 
was a rebuke as well as necessary instruction. It told them 
that conversion which produces childlikeness is necessary 
to entering the kingdom of heaven. Then He stressed the 
importance of valuing humility highly and informed them 
that He carefully guarded His “‘little ones.” 

The great lesson for us here is that in the kingdom of 
heaven the rich and the poor meet together. The haughty 
Saul of Tarsus styled himself “less than the least of the 
saints.” We are reminded of the Master’s “Blessed are the 
poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” ‘The 
greatest things of Christianity have to do with humility. 
Phil. 2 teaches us that the Incarnation was a coming down. 

Then to those that are really humble the Master assures 
divine protection. There is a woe pronounced upon the 
world because of occasions of stumbling. ‘Woe to that 
man through whom the occasion cometh.” Jesus points 
out the worth of an individual soul and advocates the 
“surgery of the saints.” The offending hand or foot or eye 
is to be gotten rid of so that the individual might be 
spared. God is careful for His children even as the shep- 
herd for his sheep. So Jesus advocated, “Have salt in 
yourselves and be at peace one with another.’ Mark 9: 50. 
The salt of peaceful humility is to be the savour of the 
saints to preserve them from bickering and quarrelling for 
positions. The disciples had not learned to observe the 

> 


222 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


exhortation, “Let. your speech be always with grace, sea- 
soned with salt,” etc. 

In Mat. 18:15—Jesus gives the method of restoring 
peace with a brother, by, first, the private interview and 
then by calling in two witnesses, and as a last resort telling 
it to the church. All these means must be used to bring 
peace with a brother ere we think of him as a Gentile anda | 
Publican. The Master then would stress the seriousness 
and responsibility of life by saying, “What things soever 
ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven,” etc. 18: 
18. Then being unable to get away from the fact of the 
importance of peace He shows them how that agreement 
is vitally connected with effectual prayer. 18: 19-20. Then 
Peter comes forth with the interrogation, “Lord, how often 
shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Unto 
seven times?” Jesus’ reply, “I say not unto thee until seven 
times but until seventy times seven,’ indicates that the 
principle of forgiveness disregards mathematics. But in 
the parable that follows, Mat. 18: 23-35, Jesus teaches that 
those that forgive, will be forgiven indeed, whereas those 
that know not how to forgive will not enjoy forgiveness. 


§ 82. Christ at the Feast of Tabernacles. (John 7: 
1-52.) 


Vs. 1-9. We are at the Feast of Tabernacles, and this 
Feast presented a very cosmopolitan scene in Jerusalem. 
The people that came to the Feast were Jews, but they were 
Jews from all lands. They would be the swarthy sons of 
the Danube, westerners from Spain, those from northern 
Africa, from Greece and Rome and all over. They would 
be distinguished by their garb, but you could tell that they 
were Jews by their physiognomies. Doubtless they came 
with great interest. This Feast came at a most opportune 
time, the weather conditions being most favorable. The 
Passover came in the winter season and the Feast of 
Pentecost, which came forty-nine days after Passover, came 
in the heat of the summer, but this Feast came in the de- 
licious cool of early autumn, and so the Jews called it “The 

o 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 223 


Feast.” One writer calls it the greatest and holiest of all 
feasts. 

It symbolized the future. This Feast of ‘Tabernacles 
was a feast of thanksgiving. ‘They thanked the Lord for 
the harvest, and it looked forward to the fruitage of the 
Jews. They there sacrificed seventy bullocks, thinking of 
these seventy bullocks being the seventy nations of heathen- 
dom. Also, as we shall show shortly, there was a part in 
the feast when the water was taken from the Pool of Siloam 
and poured on the sacrifice, significant of the pouring out 
of the Holy Ghost. 

Just at the dawn of the feast the priest would go to the 
temple and say—“Our fathers sinned because they looked 
toward the east, the rising of the sun, but we are Jehovah’s. 
Our eyes are toward Jehovah.” 

It was to this feast that the Jews went and to this feast 
that the brethren of Jesus urged Him to go. 

There is a period of six or seven months between this 
feast and the last passover. ‘This Feast of ‘Tabernacles 
involved a lot of preparation. Hence note the expression 
“at hand’”—Greek—engidso. When it was time for this 
feast, the Jews made preparation and set up the booths 
which were used. It was similar to setting up a camp. So 
these different people would try to get to Jerusalem before 
time in order that they might catch up with their sacrifices. 
For this reason the brethren were anxious to get Jesus there 
early. 

“His brethren did not believe on him.” They are later 
reported as being His disciples, but at this time they did not 
believe in Him. But there was a brotherly interest in Him, 
because of His Messianic claims. He had said enough that 
they might have gathered this from what He said. So they 
thought that the thing to do was for Him to go up and show 
what He could do. Note verse 4, “For no man doeth any- 
thing in secret, and himself seeketh to be known openly.” 
They wanted His works to be tested by those that would 
be capable of testing His works. 

Note Verse 3, “that thy disciples also may behold thy 
works which thou doest.” 

Fis own brethren wanted Him to go up to this feast and 


224 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


display His power,—‘make a fair show in the flesh.” This 
suggested in the use of this word “theoreo.” 


This challenge to go to this feast was reasonable, but they 
forgot that real discipleship is not the result of evidence, 
but it is a conversion of one of a childlike spirit. This is 
something the disciples had not learned. 


What does Jesus answer these brethren? Jesus therefore 
saith unto them, My time is not yet come; but your time is 
always ready. Note use of Greek word “kairos,’’ Kairos 
means “opportunity,” chronos “time in general.” What He 
says really is this, “My opportunity is not yet come, but 
your opportunity is already here.” He implies that these 
brethren of His were not of Him. Jesus was against the 
world and hence the world hated Him. 


Now when they went to the Feast of Tabernacles, they 
went up in bands, but Jesus did not go up that way, and 
when they got there they sought Him and asked, ‘““Where is 
He?” (vs. 11 and 12). This shows the notoriety of Jesus. 
Jesus’ method was ultra-worldly. It was beyond the world’s 
method. He had His own reasons for not doing what His 
brethren wanted Him to do. 

Notice that as He got there, vs. 14 and 15, He went in 
and taught in the midst of all that commotion. Compare 
Luke 4:18. Letters here stand for rabbinical learning and 
that was through the rabbis. Jesus got His learning with- 
out going through one of the schools of the rabbis and they 
could not understand that. Socrates debated that there is 
such a thing as truth,—take all the garments and vestments 
off and there is truth. ‘The common people heard Him 
gladly. They recognized truth. Jesus spoke the truth and 
the common people heard Him. The scribes and Pharisees 


would not hear Him because it would be a reflection on the 
school of the rabbis. 


Curist’s TEACHING TESTED 


Christ’s teaching was valid because it was of God. He 
was a self-confessed teacher, teaching not His own, but that 
of God. If the Pharisees and scribes had been unprejudiced, 
they would have admitted His teaching. 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 225 


As to tests of teaching: 


1. Test of the drawing power of the teaching. Jesus as- 
serted that His teaching drew sincere seekers. Note Verse 
17. It did draw sincere seekers. Cf. John 6: 68,69. When 
Peter wanted authentic utterance, he went to Christ. Jesus 
said “If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of 
the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak from 
myself.” Pectus Facit Theologum—‘“the heart makes the 
truly God taught.” 

2. As to whether or not the teacher seeks His own glory. 
Verse 18. 

“He that speaketh from himself seeketh his own glory: 
but he that seeketh the glory of him that sent him, the same 
is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.” Keep in mind 
the word “true” and also note the same word in verse 28. 
The word “true” in verse 18 means that Jesus was not a 
liar,—that He was a man noted for veracity. ‘The test was 
as to whether He was seeking his own glory. They put a 
question to Him. Jesus then answered them and questioned 
them. Verse 19. “Did not Moses give you the law, and 
yet none of you doeth the law? Why seek ye to kill me?” 
It was a double question. “Even if Moses gave the law, 
you did not keep it yourselves. You did not keep the law 
and now you are going to kill me for not keeping the law 
which you yourselves did not keep.” Following through 
here we have the interesting fact brought out that Jesus 
accused them of simply judging according to appearances. 
Verse 24. He simply accused them of externalism. They 
based their statements on appearances rather than on reality. 
He just told them that they did not interpret as they saw. 
You can well imagine how Christ became disgusted with 
the logic of these people. 

Verse 25. “Is not this he whom they seek to kill?” 
Verse 26. “And lo, he speaketh openly, and they say noth- 
ing to Him. Can it be that the rulers indeed know that this 
is the Christ?” ‘The question of Jesus’ Messiahship is raised 
in this verse because of the fact that He speaks openly 
though they had been seeking to kill Him. Were they ad- 
mitting that He was the Messiah? 

These fickle people, from the fact that Jesus is teaching 

15 . 


226 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


openly, say that maybe He is the Messiah because the chief 
priests and Pharisees are letting Him talk, but then some- 
body raised the popular rumor that when the Messiah came 
He would come suddenly, unexpectedly, but this man they 
had known and had known from whence He came (v. 27) 
and on this they rejected Him. ‘The common people by their 
common judgment would have claimed Him as their Mes- 
siah, but the minute they brought in their own traditions, 
they would reject Him. ‘These traditions, however, were 
so often faulty, and when applied to Christ would not fit 
and hence He would be rejected. This question was settled 
by those who were present by reverting to the possible beliet 
that the Messiah would come suddenly and unexpectedly. 
Of course this was wrong although it was their conclusion. 


Verses 28 and 29 represent Christ’s vindication of His 
own claims. After they had raised this question and an- 
swered it, Jesus was rejected by the people. Jesus did not 
let this stand, but cried out in the temple, as verse 28 says, 
“Ve both know me, and know whence I am and I am not 
come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know 
not.” Christ is vindicating here His own claim to being 
true and not a false teacher. Apparently He did it for the 
sake of those of His own disciples who were there present. 
Note the word “true.” “I am the verri vine,’ is the way 
Wycliffe translates John 15:1. This word “true” in verse 
28 means genuine or real. 

Verse 30 asserts that His time had not come. In the life 
of Christ there was a plan and hence there was protection. 
They could not do a thing with Jesus until His hour came 
because His life was according to a “blueprint,” and hence 
that life was carefully guarded by God. But notice what 
happened, v. 31. Jesus there received the popular approval. 
The people could not help but feel that He was so extraor- 
dinary that even the Messiah, for whom they were looking, 
could not do more. ‘This irritated the scribes and Pharisees 
and verse 32 teaches “‘the chief priests and the Pharisees 
sent officers to take Him.” If Jesus had been nobody, He 
would not have been bothered, but He was bothered by the 
Pharisees and scribes simply because there was something 
to Him which influenced the people. We are never jealous 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 227 


of an inferior. We are jealous of a superior and maybe an 
equal, but never an inferior. 


The cries (v. 37) of Christ in the Gospel of John are 
interesting. It meant that He raised His voice and threw 
it and everybody listened to Him. He says (v. 37), “If any 
man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.” ‘These words — 
probably suggest the fact that on each day of the Feast of 
_ Tabernacles water was brought in a golden pitcher from 
the Pool of Siloam. This was an elaborate procession. ‘Two 
priests, one carrying water and the other wine, were fol- 
lowed by the people carrying flowers in their hands. The 
two priests went to the altar where there were two pipes, 
one on each side, through which the water and wine were 
poured. It was during the pouring of this water that Jesus 
said this. The meaning we get from this is that anywhere, 
at any time, the Holy Spirit may be received and will be 
poured out from the lives of Christians that have received 
Him because Jesus said, “He that believeth on me. . ., 
out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.” The 
Jews understood the meaning of this well enough to know 
that this was typical of the Holy Spirit to be poured out one 
day. 

Notice verse 39. Do not try to teach the reception of the 
Holy Spirit subsequent to faith on this passage alone be- 
cause the Holy Spirit was not yet given. Jesus was not yet 
glorified. The Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost—‘‘the 
birthday of the Holy Spirit.” But all who do receive Jesus 
now may, as soon as they will receive this fulness of the 
Holy Spirit so that from their lives there will flow rivers 
of living water. So this truth announced here you and I 
appropriate spiritually now because the Holy Spirit has come 
and nothing hinders our accepting what Jesus taught them. 

Verse 40 and following teach that a division arose among 
these people simply because they did not know the history 
of Jesus. A few facts would have saved them. Had they 
really known a few things they would have accepted Christ 
as the Messiah. Everything they listened to with an un- 
biased mind they admitted. Note verses 40-43. They did 
not know Christ’s history. God’s will is that we all believe 
the same thing,—think the same thing. Ephesians says we 


228 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


have gifts which are given that we might all come ito the 
unity of the faith. Christ prayed that His disciples might 
all be one. Why do we differ? Ignorance and prejudice. 
There is just one Bible and just one record of things. It is 
the interpretation that makes the difference. 

Note what follows in verses 45-49. Note the contempt 
of the chief priests and the Pharisees for the conclusions of 
the unlettered. ‘These Pharisees and chief priests had such 
a contempt for the unlettered that they did not believe that 
there was any hope for the resurrection of the unlettered. 
They were “highbrows.” Notice, they seem to think noth- 
ing of what the officers say. If they had left it up to the 
rank and file of men, the middle class, Jesus would have ~ 
been accepted as the Messiah. This, however, was not God’s 
plan. Jesus made a favorable impression on the people. 
They knew He was right, but the chief priests and Pharisees 
were so prejudiced and jealous and bigoted that they would 
not admit the truth, so they denounced Christ. 

Verses 50 and 51. Nicodemus was a Pharisee, a member 
of the Sanhedrin. Of Nicodemus’ mild defense of Christ, 
S. D. Gordon says, “This was fair but feeble.” In a court 
of law that was a diplomatic way of doing a thing. It was 
just a commonplace expression, and commonplaces at such 
a time do not help. That was fair, but too feeble! Had 
Martin Luther been a timid man, would he have done the 
business? The stand which Nicodemus there took helped 
not the cause of Jesus and it disguised not the advocacy of 
Nicodemus. For Nicodemus to put up this question did not 
help Jesus any and also divulged to the other members of 
the Sanhedrin that he was for Jesus. The lesson is, don’t 
try to “carry water on both shoulders.” They put Nico- 
demus to silence by saying to him, “Art thou also of Gal- 
ilee?’’ Nothing more was said. 


§ 83. The Woman Taken in Adultery. John 7: 53-8: 
Ads 


As today, so in the days of Christ’s bodily presence on 
earth, He was the touchstone of all who came in contact 
with Him. Men divided over Him. Some said, “He is a 
good man”; others said, “Not so, but he leadeth the multi- 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 229 


tude astray” (Jno. 7:12). “The Jews therefore marvelled 
saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never 
learned?” (Jno. 7:15). “Some of the multitude . . . said, 
‘This is of a truth the prophet’” (7:40). “Others said, 
This is the Christ” (7:41). ‘But some said, What, doth 
the Christ come out of Galilee?” (7:41). ‘So there arose 
a division . . . because of Him” (7:43). The Pharisees 
were genuinely provoked at the officers because the latter 
did not apprehend Christ and take Him to them. ‘The 
officers gave as an excuse, “Never man so spake.” Where- 
upon the Pharisees twitted them, classing them with the 
ignorant multitude. Finally, it was the scribe and Pharisee 
class that was bent on rejecting Jesus of Nazareth of Galilee. 
Their chief reason, as given, was, “Out of Galilee ariseth 
no prophet” (7:52). 

These varying opirfions of the Master prevailed at the 
Feast of Tabernacles. It was while Jesus was attending 
this feast that He was in such demand as a teacher. ‘All 
the people came unto him.” Despite Jewish antagonism 
(Jno. 7:1), He seemed to be realizing the ambition of His 
brethren (Jno. 7: 3-4). 

But the scribes and Pharisees were ill at ease so long as 
He was the center of attraction. A woman had been found 
in adultery. They use this as a test case on Jesus in order 
to embarrass Him before the multitude. So the woman, 
“their trembling prisoner—unveiled, and exposed before the 
crowd of men—the bitterest degradation to an Eastern 
woman, they set before Jesus.”"—Getkie. Then, affecting 
deference to Him whom they despised, they, with feigned 
humility, asked, “Teacher, this woman hath been taken in 
adultery, in the very act. Now inthe law Moses commanded 
us to stone such: what then sayest thou of her?” 

As John explains, “And this they said, tempting (trying) 
him, that they might have whereof to accuse him.” ‘These 
heartless accusers of this poor, unfortunate victim, these 
adverse critics of the Son of God, thought they had Christ 
between the horns of a dilemma. Moses’ law was on one 
side and His teachings on mercy and forgiveness on the 
other. If He were true to Moses how could He be merciful 
to the woman? And if He were inclined to exercise mercy, 


230 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


then what of the requirements of the law in such a case? 
But they did not really know Jesus. His resourcefulness, 
in this instance, grew out of His goodness, His purity, His 
gentlemanliness; yes, and His knowledge of their hypocrisy. 

The God-man could not deal with the case heartlessly and 
mechanically. So, blushing, we fancy, He “stooped down, 
and . . . wrote on the ground.” What did He write? 1 
am of the opinion that had the woman’s accusers read they 
would not have been compelled to listen to His indirect 
accusation. But they, thinking they had the “Greater than | 
Solomon” in a corner, “continued asking him.” So sure 
were they of their case that they suffered from over-con- 
fidence. So finally and slowly Jesus “lifted himself and 
said, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast 
a stone at her.” ‘Then He again stooped and went on with 
His writing. What else could He do? He left them with 
their own guilty consciences, and the scrutinizing gaze of a 
curious, if not an accusing, crowd. ‘They filed out, the 
eldest, who “best knew the plague of their own hearts” 
(Smith), leading the way. This was the reversal of the 
procedure in the Sanhedrin, where the vote is taken “begin- 
ning with the youngest.” ‘This reversal showed their em- 
barrassment and confusion. 

So Jesus was left alone with the woman—wmuisera et miser- 
icordia, as Augustine has it. He who was full of pity was 
left with her that was pitiable. No one had condemned her 
by casting a stone at her (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:24). The 
Master, in charity, quieted her penitent fears with “Neither 
do I condemn thee.” He, in candor and caution, strength- 
ened her irresolute will with, “From henceforth sin no 
more.”’ 

The accusers were self-condemned; the accused left hope- 
ful and purged. 


§ 84. Discourse on the Light of the World. John 8: 


This discussion was doubtless delivered on one of the 
porches of the Court of the Women. This Court of the 
Women was brilliantly illuminated by four great candelabra, 
and as Christ gazed upon these great lights that burned dur- 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 231 


ing the feast, He thought of what He was to the world as 
to light, as He says in verse 12. This illumination by these 
candelabra in the Court of the Women was known as the 
joy of the feast, and Christ was speaking to. Jews here. 
Probably not the Jews of Galilee, but of Judea and Jeru- 
salem and hence they did not know Him so well as His 
fellow Galileans. But being Jews, they would all have some 
conception of what He meant by the light, for they looked 
for a Messiah who would be a light, who would reveal the 
light of God. If they had believed that He was the Messiah, 
they would have thought of this Jewish conception. 

Notice, as verse 16 indicates, that as soon as He had made 
this claim, He provoked the Pharisees, who said, “Thou 
bearest witness of thyself; thy witness is not true.” ‘That 
is to say, Christ made a bold authoritative utterance that He 
was the light of the world, and the Pharisees were not will- 
ing to admit His statement. They said that it was His own 
statement and He had no one to corroborate His own state- 
ment. 

Verse 14 tells how difficult His task was. No one there 
knew whence He had come and whither He was going be- 
cause no one else present had come with Him. 

They misjudged, but He did not. So this implication in 
verse 15 is simply that Christ showed them that they had a 
moral incapacity to understand Him. “Ye judge after the 


flesh; I judge no man. Yea and if I judge, my judgment © - 


is true; for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent 
me.’ So He raises this other point. He is not alone for 
His Father is attesting to Him, is bearing witness. Noth- 
ing is stated here as to what He refers to as the testimony 
of the Father, but doubtless He was thinking of the works 
that He had done which should have convinced them that 
God was back of Him. It was a two-fold witness—super- 
natural works and His own witness. See verse 17. But 
they had a moral incapacity, which Jesus tells them. Christ, 
by bringing in the witness of the Father together with His 
own witness, had a real case according to their law, but they 
could not see it because of its being incomprehensible to 
them through their moral incapacity. This was the difficulty 
through which Jesus labored all the time. 


232 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Verse 21 and following refer to the fruitless quest of the 
Jews for the Messiah down through the centuries. He said, 
“IT go away—whither I go, ye cannot come.” ‘There has 
been a seeking for the Messiah ever since Christ’s day on 
the part of the Jews. This has been a fruitless quest. We 
cannot help but think just here of how professedly Christian 
nations have driven out the Jews, persecuted the Jews, but 
Jesus in His prophetic utterance maybe foretold that. Where 
Christ has taken the Church, Judaism cannot follow. Christ . 
says, “Ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins.” 


The reason for their dying in their sins and not seeing 
Him, was that they were mundane or worldly. ‘That is to 
say, they were simply of the world. He said in verse 23, 
“T am not of this world.” The implication was that they 
were, and because of this, they would die in their sins. 
Faith in Christ is the touchstone. It is the test. 


Note the statement in verse 28, “Jesus therefore said, 
When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know 
that Iam he.” ‘That is to say, “You will not be in doubt.” 
The light of the world, according to the Jewish conception, 
would be the Messiah. They doubted it, but Jesus said, 
“There is coming a time when ye shall know that I am he.” 
The question is, “What does He mean by verse 28?” This 
expression “lifted up” is used in two senses both in the He- 
brew and following in the Greek, and the idea is that you 
may be lifted up in shame, as Christ was on Calvary’s cruel 
cross, or you may be lifted up in exaltation. Scholars in- 
dicate that either one of those interpretations is allowable. 
Wasn't that true when Christ was crucified? On the other 
hand, there is coming a time when Christ is to be exalted 
over the Jews, and at that time they will doubtless think of 
what He said at this time. 

Notice verse 30 which teaches that the convincing life of 
Christ caused converts to come to Him. There were many 
who followed Him, and the thing that we see right through 
here is that the issue is between Christ and the religious 
teachers; not an issue between Christ and the common peo- 
ple, but between Christ and the religious teachers. ‘They 
had certain rules and regulations that they expected the 


THIRD PERIOD OF THE GALILEAN MINISTRY 233 


Messiah to come up to, but their expectations were not 
exactly right and so they failed. 


§ 85. Discourse on Spiritual Freedom. John 8: 31-59. 


Notice in verse 33 and following that the Jews boasted 
of their freedom, simply because of their ancestry. They 
were Abraham’s seed. Jesus soon tells them that they are 
really servants because they are slaves to their own sinful 
selves. So, although they think they are free, they think 
mistakenly, and actually He tells them that they are bond- 
servants rather than freemen. 

This discourse gave Him occasion to again announce His 
sonship. What He actually does is to contrast the place and 
permanency of the Son with the servant. Of course, He is 
the Son and they are the servants. 

Consider how this would humiliate them. Though Abra- 
ham’s seed on the natural side, yet they were of the devil. 
See verse 44. 

Verse 46 asks, “Which of you convicteth me of sin?” To 
convince a man, you must get him to say amen to what you 
say in reference to him. 

Jesus our Lord and Master, by making these state- 
ments, brings Himself, as they think, into clash with 
Abraham. Notice verse 52 and following. Here you have 
Christ contrasted with Abraham and the prophets, and in 
this we see that they recognized that these were the good 
and great men of the past. 

These men had all died, and this Jesus is pretending to 
teach a doctrine which, if they accept, will keep them from 
death, and they could not understand that. They thought 
only of natural death. 

In verse 54 and following you have Jesus’ rebuttal to their 
statements. Christ was thought by the Jews to have exalted 
Himself above Abraham, yet really Abraham had exalted 
Christ. ‘The Jews accused Christ of self-exaltation, of 
placing Himself above Abraham. But Jesus specifically 
states that Abraham had looked forward to the day of the 
Messiah, and Abraham had rejoiced to see the day of the 
Messiah, but they did not understand these things. Here iS 
the pathos of it all. See Luke 24—the walk to Emmaus. 


234 ._ CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


They did not understand their own Scriptures. It was a 
dark and unknown language to them. So as Jesus spoke 
here He referred to the same incidents they did, but He 
glorified those instances. He gave them the proper mean- 
ing. Had Abraham lived He would have been the first one 
to have taken up with Christ. If we are not careful it will 
be impossible for us to say with the Psalmist, “I am wiser 
than my teachers.” All these Jews lacked the vision, the 
perspective of Abraham, and they could not appreciate His 
words. So we need spiritual insight. The only way to get 
the meaning of the Bible is by having the Holy Spirit 
illuminate our minds. 

Do you think that His own disciples understood Him? 
By no means, but they followed Him by naked faith. They 
went on to Pentecost and waited there. Then they began 
to understand. 

Here is a case of the clash of a great man embodying the 
truth of God, with a system, and that is where the feathers 
fly,—that is where things happened. When you come into 
conflict with a system, folks will stand up for it. 

In verse 58 the eternity of Christ is suggested. Jesus is 
trying to tell these poor people of His being eternal. “Be- 
fore Abraham was, Iam.” ‘That is to say, “Before Abra- 
ham became, I was.” Or “Before Abraham was, I was.” 
But Jesus does not live in any “was” or “will be,” He lives 
in the “I am,” the eternal now, or present. “Before Abra- 
ham made his appearance, before that, I was, and I am, 
and I ever will be.” Christ tried to get these folks to see 
the eternity of the Son of God. They didn’t have an ap- 
perceptive basis, so He spoke in dark language. 


PART VII 


Perean Mmustry 


"a 
i 


Tyke Beek re heat emmy 
Ra UCR AL ML 
toy , ete Py 





PEREAN MINISTRY 


§ 86. The Final Departure from Galilee. Mat. 19: 1, 
2; 8: (18) 19-22; Mark 10:1; Luke 9: 51-62. 


The interesting part to us is the study of the 19th verse 
and following of Matthew 8. There are two classes of per- 
sons mentioned here. One class is represented by this scribe 
who was an impulsive person, and evidently he was incon- 
siderate. He had not counted the cost, and so he simply 
said, “I will follow Thee whithersoever Thou goest.’”’ Jesus 
rather discouraged this man by telling him, “The foxes have 
holes, and the birds of the heaven have nests, but the Son 
of man hath not where to lay his head.” ‘The Lord Jesus 
Christ wanted this man to know that the Kingdom’s in- 
terest would come first and’ that he must be willing, if he 
would follow the Lord, to give up home for the interests of 
the Kingdom, and that is about all there is to be said of 
this character,—impulsive, inconsiderate, did not count the 
cost, and so Jesus tried to get him to count the cost. 


The other case before us is that of a certain disciple who 
made the excuse that he must bury his father. As to whether 
his father was dead or not we do not know. There were 
those who were not called who could have looked after him. 
The teaching here is that there are higher duties than those 
of keeping the Jewish law which called for the burying of 
the father by the son, and even higher duties than those of 
natural reverential ties; and there is a higher call than the 
call of men. ‘There is a higher call than any of these. The 
important thing also is that there are critical times that come 
into our lives, and Christ wants us to pay attention to these 
particular times and act—strike while the iron is hot. 

You will notice that Luke brings in apparently another 
instance of a man who said, “I will follow Thee, Lord; 
but first suffer me to bid farewell to them that are at my 
house.” Jesus said, “No man, having put his hand to the 
plough, and looking back, is fit for the Kingdom of God.” 

237 


238 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Doubtless here Christ is re-enforcing the need of strict 
attention to the business of following Christ by alluding to 
the ploughman and his work and by the ploughman’s neces- 
sary application to his work. ‘To look back would be to 
make a crooked furrow or a crooked row. You have to 
keep your eye upon the mark. The practical point is strict 
attention to business. 
We sum this up in the following points: 


1. Self-denial. This may mean homelessness. 
2. Prompt surrender to Christ’s work. 
3. Attention to the Master’s business. 


§ 87. The Mission of the Seventy. Luke 10: 1-24, 


The first thing to be noted is the difference between the 
sending out of the seventy and the sending out of the twelve. 
The sending out of the twelve was an appointment to the 
apostolate. It was evangelistic and missionary. There was 
no power or authority formaily conferred upon the seventy. 
It was just a temporary mission for one definite purpose, 
and that was to prepare for Christ’s going to different 
places. John the Baptist came to prepare for Christ’s com- 
ing as the Messiah of the Jews. He was the forerunner. 
Just as John the Baptist made preparation for the first com- 
ing of Christ to the Jews, so these seventy made preparation 
for Christ that He might enter the cities from Galilee to 
Jerusalem. If applied to ourselves, we today, like those 
seventy, are to go ahead and prepare for Christ’s coming to 
earth. 


§ 88. The Good Samaritan. Luke 10: 25-37. 


Lawyer “Made Trial” 

Student of law. Malice in heart. 
Teacher of law. A forbidden kind of trial- 
Pharisee. making. 
Self-righteous, conceited. Unusual Greek word for 
It was his living. this (ekpeiradzo) test 
Tried to maintain his repu- thoroughly. 

tation. Wanted to justify self. 


Felt a sense of superiority. 


PEREAN MINISTRY 239 


‘‘NEIGHBORLINESS 


1. Who is my neighbor? 

a. Whom others neglect. 

b. Whom I may help. 

c. Whom I might have hated. 
2. Proof of neighborliness. 

a. Forgetfulness of past. 

b. Tender care in present. 

c. Provision in future.” 


—Dr. Breed. 


“Our SAMARITAN NEIGHBORS 


. Who are they? 

. What mistakes toward them? 
What do we learn from them? 
. How did Christ treat them? 

. Are you Christians?” 


—Dr, Breed. 


§ 89. The Visit to Mary and Martha. Luke 10: 38-42. 


When Jesus was upon earth, He was the object of the 
adoration of His friends, as well as the target for the criti- 
cism of His enemies. He was the magnetic figure which 
attracted that small group to whom He committed the 
Church before His ascension, but at the same time caused 
chaos to reign in the camp of His enemies. Their pet 
theories and dearly held traditions He often belittled. ‘The 
narrative before us presented, as given by Luke, shows how 
He dealt with those that adored Him. 

We here see Jesus in the home of His friends. 


1. Mary’s receptivity. 


The home of Martha, Mary and Lazarus was often the 
haven of Jesus to which He would betake Himself from the 
storm on the sea of life. There He found congenial com- 
panionship and fertile soil for the precious seed of truth. 
This home was doubtless a most interesting one. Certainly 
the two sisters were sufficiently different as to afford variety. 


240 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Mary chose to sit at Jesus’ feet and hear His word. She 
evidently was not the hostess. Being the younger of the 
two, she assumed little responsibility and so was free to 
contemplate the wonderful teaching of the Master Teacher. 


2. Martha’s Responsibility. 


Martha, on the other hand, was cumbered by much serv- 
ing. She was not satisfied unless everything was properly 
arranged about the home. According to her ideals, nothing 
short of a perfectly arranged home would do. She was 
concerned about preparing a sumptuous repast for her dis- 
tinguished guest and was distressed because Mary did not 
share her responsibility. So great was her anxiety in the 
matter that she approached Jesus with the almost reproach- 
ful question, “Lord, dost Thou not care that my sister has 
left me to serve alone?” ‘The purpose of her question to 
Jesus was that He would bid Mary arise from her seat of 
learning and busy herself about the house, but instead of 
Jesus doing this, He addressed Martha by repeating her 
name. His “Martha, Martha,” reminds us of his saying to 
Peter, “Simon, Simon,’ and to Saul: “Saul “Sauk? Ger 
tainly He reproached Martha because she was troubled about 
many things. He was advising Martha to live a simple life, 
and approving of Mary, because she had “chosen that good 
part.” | 


3. Modern Marys and Marthas. 


Clearly Martha and Mary stand for two distinct types of 
Christians. There are those who emphasize works so 
strongly that worship is well nigh excluded, and of course 
there are those that are so given up to devotion that they 
are likely to neglect the practical affairs. We cannot let 
Mary stand for this latter class, however, because Jesus had 
no word of condemnation for her and surely He would 
have condemned any laxity in practical matters. Our idea 
is that Mary stands for the class of Christians that gives 
sufficient time to sitting at Jesus’ feet. Christians of this 
type need not neglect those necessary duties of life over 
which the type represented by Martha wastes so much ner- 
vous energy. ‘The reproof given Martha should be taken 
by all who imagine that the best of life can be gotten out of 


PEREAN MINISTRY 241 


ministering to the appetites and esthetic tastes. Just as 
Martha would have had the home arranged so as to please 
the most fastidious taste, and supper prepared that would 
tempt any one, so there are those today who believe that the 
most important thing is to be catering to the tastes of their 
fellows. They try to make the world better by showing 
forth the beautiful. They are active in the lines of social 
service. They are students of dietetics. They go in for the 
study of sanitation. They spend a lot of time on the archi- 
tecture of the Church building. They devise proper forms 
of worship and see that they are carried out most punc- 
tiliously. But too often they fail to do that for which Mary 
was commended by Jesus, though condemned by Martha: 
They fail to sit at Jesus’ feet. The pathos of it all is that 
the Christian of the Martha type tries to satisfy herself with 
the husks and neglects the corn. If we learn of Christ 
surely we will be adjusted to the world about us with less 
trouble than if we did not know Christ. He helps us under- 
stand the world. Communion with Him develops character ; 
it makes men and women. 


§ 90. Healing of the Man Born Blind. John 9. 


The first thing to be noted in this section is that human 
incapacity or sickness is not always a result of sin (that is 
what verse 3 tells), but, as is here stated, “that the works 
of God should be manifested.” ‘That is the reason he was 
born blind. Of course, the Jews of that day had some 
knowledge of prenatal influence as we do, and they applied 
that to things religious. You know how that was in the 
case of Job. The “miserable comforters” believed that 
surely Job had sinned when he was sick. The book of Job 
was written just to show the opposite. He wasn’t sick be- 
cause he had sinned. God had him sick for a purpose. 
Generally speaking, sin is the result of the fall. 

Note the use of means—remedies. He used clay and He 
used spittle. Edersheim gives this interpretation. He calls 
our attention to the fact that our Lord Jesus Christ used 
this means, clay, which was in that day a common remedy 
for eye trouble, but not for blindness. But He used it to 
make the blind man receptive. We do not give the blind 

16 


242 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


man any credit for having his eyes opened. Jesus started in 
to use this remedy that the blind man might have a chance— 
to make him receptive since the blind man did not know 
who Jesus was yet. 

This also note as to means. The means were inadequate. 
Naturally the clay had never been known to heal a man of 
blindness, only of eye trouble. This seems to be the prom- 
inent thing. Then note the symbolism of it. He who first 
breathed on the clay and made man out of the clay, breath- 
ing into his nostrils the breath of life, spits on the clay, and 
the man washes in the Pool of Siloam, from which pool 
water was taken and used at the Feast of Tabernacles. 
Water was likened to the Holy Spirit. Now, of course, 
man’s spiritual eyes are opened by God. This is symbolical 
of it all. He who made man out of the dust of the earth, 
takes the clay and uses it on man, who is made of clay. 

Then the Holy Spirit is used also as the executive power 
of the Godhead, and the water, symbolical of the Holy 
Spirit, is brought in. Jesus did not convey by speech all 
He signified by what He did. 

Note that what Jesus did here in bringing this man’s 
sight back to him provoked a division. See verse 13 and 
following. 

Verse 16 states, “And there was a division among them.” 
On what were they divided? Is He of God or not? A 
division growing out of the question as to whether or not 
Christ was from God. The blind man was for His being 
from God. The religionists were against Him. This man 
voted for Christ as being from God simply because he had 
experienced the power of God. ‘The religionists voted 
against Him because He did not agree with their customs 
and laws. They had pigmy notions. He broke through 
their notions. 

The testimony of the man who had been made to see was 
true and frank. This man simply told the truth as far as 
he knew it. He was frank. He was not a diplomat. 

Did this man know that Christ was God when He healed 
him of his blindness? No, but as he went along he came 
into the light. The testimony had a good effect on him. 
Let us be true to our experiences. Don’t forget what God 


PEREAN MINISTRY 243 


has done for us wherever we go. He was brought into a 
place of deeper experience and greater vision. 

Experience is greater than theory. See verse 27 and fol- 
lowing. This man was just telling them his experience. 
Note that the fact of his own experience was in line with 
the deeper meaning of the Word of God,—that he soon 
came to the place where he said, “Lord, I believe.” Verse 
38. This blind man healed was so responsive to Christ that 
he would take the teaching of Christ. Jesus was in the 
midst of a lot of blind folks whose eyes had been closed 
with the traditionalism of the past; and here was a man 
that God had foreordained should be blind and go into this 
experience in order that Christ might teach what He wanted 
to teach. He had come in contact with Christ by experience. 

In verses 39-41, Christ is speaking of natural blindness 
and spiritual blindness,—natural sight and spiritual sight. 
He is referring to the Pharisees to whom He is speaking. 
They are as the blind guides. “If the blind lead the blind, 
they shall both fall into the ditch.” Jesus talks to these 
people and says they may have their eyes opened. By the 
healing of the blind man, Jesus instructed the blind guides. 


§ 91. The Good Shepherd. John 10: 1-21. 


1. Christ against the Pharisees. 


Christ as the shepherd is given control of the flock by the 
porter, or night-guard. The sheep at night were guarded by 
an undershepherd who was called a porter because he 
watched the door through which the sheep entered. Now 
when the morning came the real shepherd, the day shep- 
herd, would come to this door and the porter would let him 
come in and take his flock out. Then there were thieves who 
were robbers or wall-climbers. Instead of coming to the 
door, they would sometimes climb over the fence and get 
the sheep. What Jesus was saying in figure is that these 
Pharisees were the robbers, the thieves. They were not the 
real shepherds, This is really the finest section for the 
study of pastoral work that we can use. Note the change 
of figures. 

The porter is the man who takes care of the sheep at 
night and this shepherd gives the sheep over to the day 


244 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


shepherd and Christ is the day shepherd. In contrast with 
this, the Pharisees are like these wall-climbers. ‘These Phar- 
isees had no concern for the blind man. They were not 
shepherds. Jesus was the real shepherd, and since the blind 
man responded, Jesus put the clay on his eyes and the blind 
man thought that He was going to help his eyes. As soon 
as there is a little response, then you begin to get the mes- 
sage. The Pharisees did not want to listen to the voice of 
the shepherd. They wanted to steal the sheep. 


2. Christ in allegory. 


a. He is the door into the room of grace or into the room 
of mercy. To come back to the blind man, were the Phar- 
isees willing to admit the blind man into the room of mercy? 
No. But Christ is the door. 

b. Christ is the shepherd. Notice the contrast following. 
He is the good shepherd. The good in contrast with false 
shepherds. He is the good shepherd in contrast with the 
hireling. See verse 13. 

c. Christ is the shepherd, not of the Jews only, but of the 
Gentiles. “Other sheep I have.” Christ is the shepherd of 
all the sheep. 

d. Christ is the shepherd of one big flock. Verse 16. 
There may be one flock and one shepherd. 


§ 92. Christ at the Feast of Dedication. John 10: 22- 
42. 


This Feast of Dedication was during the early part of 
December, probably December 1-8, and was just about the 
time of the birthday of Christ. He spent it in the taber- 
nacle. It was instituted by Judas Maccabeus, 164 B. C. 


Now at this feast the Jews came round about Him, as 
verse 24 says, and said, “How long dost thou hold us in 
suspense? If thou art the Christ, tell us plainly.” Verse 25. 
‘‘Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believe not.” ‘This 
was a hypocritical question and Jesus knew it and so He 
made his appeal to the works—to the works rather than to 
words. He goes on to say that they would not believe His 
works because they were not His sheep. Then He makes 
the reference to the attitude of the sheep. “My sheep hear 


PEREAN MINISTRY 245 


my voice, and I know them, and they follow me (v. 27); 
and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never 
perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand.” Now 
there is right here a triplet of double parallelisms: 


Mime CCD. NEATH INY (VOICGS .1; <.0s: 4! ayv) ciate be) ese) ti man. 
Re me LET thy Portal) al. bes fr hg Sct 8 phrcintas aliniatesa’s a's) ae God. 
Ree EO NRCC rere ee tect tale Ce vie Vis sale ate at man. 
Pereverlinta thet crertia ys MLC tos snag 2 ale. ees God. 
PE EURSHAL NGVEIODETISN: cies oes ee tite ee eet e a man. 
No one shall snatch them out of my hand ...... God. 


Here we have raised the question of the security of the 
saints. ‘No one shall snatch them out of the Father’s 
hands.” Verse 29. Christ here identifies Himself with God 
the Father, and it is not only He who is able to hold His 
sheep, but God, the Father, is able to hold the sheep, and 
He and the Father are one. Edersheim says concerning the 
security of the saints, as follows: 


“Do these words convey what is commonly called the 
doctrine of perseverance of the saints? Nay! but they 
teach us, not about our faith, but about His faithfulness, 
and convey to us assurance concerning Him rather than .our- 
selves; and this is the only aspect in which the doctrine of 
perseverance is either safe, true or scriptural.” 

This is very interesting. We hear a lot on this particular 
verse, ‘“They shall never perish, and no one shall snatch 
them out of my hand.” There are two sides to those truths 
and that is the reason we dispute about them. 

Edersheim warns us here that He is not speaking so much 
of the faith of the sheep, but the faithfulness of the shep- 
herd. Peter gives us the other side. He says, “We are kept 
by the power of God through faith.” He refers also to the 
strong hand of God out of which we cannot be plucked as 
long as our faith holds. We are kept by fatth. 

Notice verse 30. “I and the Father are one.” This is a 
very interesting expression in the original. “Esmen hen” 
—‘‘we”’ the plural, and then “one” in the singular. I and 
the Father one (we are). On this particular passage St. 


246 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Augustine remarks that the word “one” tells against Arian- 
ism, and the plural “are” tells against Sabellianism. 


Arianism—subordination of the Son,—not of the same 
essence as the Father, but subordinate. 

Sabellianism—emphasizes the “one” and the one in the 
sense of there being only one substance and one per- 
son, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being three 
different names for the same person. 


Neither of these is correct, of course. You see right 
through here that the Jews were rather Arian with respect 
to Christ (v. 33). They thought He was just an ordinary 
man. Notice here that Christ appealed to His works. 

The Jews attempted to stone Him then. Verses 31 and 
32. “For which of those works do ye stone me?” He 
changed their minds by this question. The works of Christ 
were beyond doubt. He had done works. His words were 
doubted, but His works could not be doubted, and His ap- 
peal was always finally to His works. Christ came to show 
us the Father. He was an expression of divinity. He had 
a mission—to save the world. Now if people would not 
allow His divinity and would refuse to give cognizance to 
His mission, then He would plead His works. Here He 
pleads His works as a last resort. 

In verses 33-39 reference is made to the judges who were 
representatives of God and executives of God, the vicars, 
and so they were called gods. Now Jesus knew that the 
Jews believed these Old Testament Scriptures, and so He 
took them to their own Scriptures. Because He had said 
He was the Son of God, they said He blasphemed. He 
simply showed them how illogical they were. ‘They recog- 
nized that the judges represented God and why should they 
take such exception to His being called the Son of God? 
“If I do not the works of my Father,” says He, “believe me 
not.” He again makes appeal to His works. 

Verses 40-42 tell of the men who had heard John and 
they had come to believe after John’s death. It is very in- 
teresting and encouraging to us who preach the Gospel. 
They were the posthumous people of John. They believed 
because of what John had told them before. 


PEREAN MINISTRY 247 


§ 93. Discourse on Prayer. (Luke 11: 1-13.) 
Verses 1-4. Outline from John L. Campbell, D.D. 


“LO Ta ES ach BUY ERT Sa eee Child addressing father. 
“Thy kingdom come” ........ Subject to a king. 

Un will:be done* foe.).00 0. Slave to a master. 
pestvestie this Gay: EC... ss Beggar to beneficiary. 
fForgive us our sins’ ...)...... Sinner to his Saviour. 
“Lead us not into temptation.” . Pilgrim to guide. 

“But deliver us from evil.” ..... Captive to deliverer. 


We speak of this as being a model prayer and think of it 
as such. ‘This prayer contains the principles that we should 
follow in praying. Of course, when the Lord gave His 
disciples this prayer, He did not mean that they should fol- 
low in detail. 


Verses 5-12 seem to teach that the importunate fellow is 
the fellow who will receive simply because he hangs on. 
It is a case of simple mechanical ability. But I don’t think 
that that is the point. The lesson is the value of wmportu- 
nity in view of great difficulties. It is late at night and the 
door had been locked and this man is in his bed. There are 
a great many difficulties. Think also of a great need. Here 
is a man whose friend has come, travelled a long distance, 
brought no knapsack, and is very hungry. There is an 
insistent, clamoring need, but a great many difficulties in 
the way. If we have a need, present it. The need cries 
and it is the need that brings the supply. The Lord gives 
us according to the need. Of course, the Lord teaches that 
importunity is necessary. If you want something, if you 
are hungry for something, then you will be receptive for 
it. If there is sufficient importunity, that indicates receptiv- 
ity, and receptivity is what receives. He is trying to teach 
us that if we have a great need and make it known, we will 
have a supply of that need. But the need has got to be 
apparent. Now that man needed the bread. Jesus is trying 
to teach in prayer that if you really want things, go after 
them. If a man wants a thing, he will pray for it. Your 
praying is like a robin opening his mouth—he not only 
opens his mouth, but stretches his neck. Importunity. 


248 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Note verse 10. ‘Everyone that asketh receiveth.” Trans- 
late “everyone’—“‘anyone” “each one,” “any person.” The 
Lord is no respecter of persons. Then He goes on to say 
that the Holy Spirit will be given us to minister to us the 
things of God,—to help us out,—and the Holy Spirit is 
given to them that ask of Him. You will pray, if you want. 


§ 94. Discourse Against the Pharisees. (Mat. 12: 22- 
32; Mark 3: 22-30; Luke 11: 14-54.) 


I choose to think of this as “Jesus in the presence of His 
enemies.” Christ had come into open opposition to the 
Pharisees. ‘These Pharisees, of course, were really in their 
day like many in our day, in that they did not understand 
the real meaning of the Scriptures and they put emphasis 
where emphasis should not have been placed. Here He 
checks them up, you notice, because they are so punctilious 
in little matters and so remiss in great matters. ‘They leave 
undone the things of importance and do things of unim- 
portance. They put emphasis on trivialities at the expense 
of things important. In our day it is the same. 

Another point is that they were fond of the seats of 
honor in the synagogues. ‘They, I presume, are matched 
by modern men who enter church politics for prominent 
places and are not willing to take the lower places until 
the Lord exalts them. The sin is that of projecting yourself 
into a place for which you are poorly qualified. These 
Pharisees were proud men,—wanted to be flattered,—men 
of conceit. Now Jesus criticised and condemned these 
Pharisees because of their religious superficiality. They 
tried to trap Him in His talk. They correspond to Zophar 
in the Book of Job. They are of little value. 


§ 95. Teachings Concerning Trust in God and Com- 
ing Judgment. Luke, 12. 


I see this as a section of warnings. 

Notice it is given to His disciples. v. 1. The text, or 
pivotical sentence, would be the fifth verse. Luke 12:5a 
“T will warn you.” 


PEREAN MINISTRY 249 


I. Warnings against hypocrisy. vs. 1-12. 


1. The Pharisees are the examples of hypocrisy. 
a. Revelation is certain. vy. 2. There is nothing 
covered up. 
b. Retribution before God is sure. vs. 4, 5. 


Of course, the particular charge is to beware lest some 
minor present inconvenience dim the eyes to the greater 
future penalty. Now these Pharisees were intimidated and 
were intimidating those about them, and we must remember 
that there is a reckoning day coming, and so we have this 
warning. 


c. The reward is reckoned. v. 6. 
Divine justice deals with details. 
d. The resistance to the good offices of the Holy 
Spirit is necessarily damning. vs. 8-12. 


That is to say, here you have Christians against the good 
offices of the Holy Spirit. Now the Holy Spirit is to come 
and tell you what to do, to guide you into all truth, and 
if you resist Him you are going to suffer. It is damning 
if you reject His offices. You take the crutches out from 
under yourself and you fall down naturally. Let the Holy 
Spirit lead you. Follow the gleam. 


II. Warnings against covetousness. vs. 13-21. 
1. The occasion of this warning. 


The occasion is that there is a request for Jesus to step 
aside from His designated work, and the object of this 
warning is to show that the never-dying soul has eternal 
interests which have prior claims. Jesus shows this by a 
parable. Here you have an exhortation against covetous- 
ness. Jesus says the material things are not of prime inter- 
est. 

Ill. Warnings against anxiety or care. vs. 23-34. 


An English historian says that Queen Ann died of 
“thought.” All her children died, her husband died, and 
she was left alone and brooded and pined away, and so it 
is said that she died of “thought.” 

The word “be anxious” or “be thoughtful” as the King 
James Version says, or “be careful” as Peter says, means to 


250 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


be divided as to your mind. ‘That is, care is simply a divi- 
sion of interests. 
1. The exhortation is specific. Note 22b. 
‘he reasons are here given. “For the life is more than 
food, and the body is more than raiment.” 
2. Examples. 
a. The ravens. v. 24. 


he ravens come to be full grown ravens without care. 
They teach us that we will get enough to eat. Over against 
the specific warning to be not anxious for what you shall 
eat, stand the ravens. ) 
b. The lilies and the grass. 
They are adorned and clothed without toil. They tell 
us that we will look just as we ought to look. 


3. An examination of the careful reveals the follow- 
ing things: 

a. Reveals little faith. 28b. 

b. They are of a doubtful mind. v. 29. 

c. It reveals that they are worldly minded. v. 30. 
4. The encouragement. 

a. The Father knows. v. 30. 

b. You will receive. v. 31. 
5. Everlasting assurance. vs. 33 and 34. 


IV. Warning against languor. vs. 35-40. 
1. Hence, 35a teaches to be ready to run. 
2. 35b teaches to be lit up for the journey. 
3. Verses 36-41 teach watchful waiting. 
a. Watchful waiting for the bridegroom. 
b. Watchful waiting for the thief. 


V. Warning against special privilege. Verses 41 and 
following. 
1. Faithfulness in performance of duty will bring 
reward to anybody. 
2. Ignorance mitigates but does not do away with the 
punishment. There are no “favorites” in the 
Kingdom. 


PEREAN MINISTRY 251 


VI. Warning against persecutions. vs. 49-53. 


“T came to cast fire upon the earth.” This is the fire of 
trial. See v. 50. Jesus foresaw Calvary. There is a 
fiery trial awaiting each of us and the odds are against us. 
Those nearest us will test us most. 


VII. Warning against ignorance of spiritual insight. vs. 
54 and 59, 


$96. The Galileans Slain by Pilate. Luke 13: 1-9. 


As Jesus of Nazareth of Galilee moved among the people 
“some... .told him of the Galileans whose blood Pilate had 
mingled with their sacrifices.” At the Feast of Tabernacles 
Galileans, resentful of the appropriation of the temple tax 
by Pilate, had provoked the Roman Governor by “seditious 
words.” The reverence of these Galileans had been out- 
raged by the sacrifices offered daily for the Empire and 
the Emperor in the temple. The Roman garrison and 
pickets at the temple, for the purpose of maintaining order, 
was aggravating to the Galileans also. But the using of 
the temple tax to defray the expense of bringing a better 
supply of water into Jerusalem was apparently the immedi- 
ate cause of the Galileans going to the government of 
Pilate that the work be discontinued. But Pilate, this time, 
answered them with clubs wielded by his soldiers in plain 
clothes, who beat down the mob. ‘They even invaded 
the temple, where some poor pilgrims were killing their own 
sacrifices, and mingled their blood with the sacrifices. This, 
of course, polluted the House of God. Hence the stir and 
the spread and repetition of the outrageous story. 

In Jesus’ previous discourse (Luke 12: 54-59) He had 
referred to “‘the terrible national storm that was nearing.” 
He here avails Himself of the incident of the slaughter of 
the Galileans by Pilate to say that all Galileans, yea all of 
the Jews, are about to suffer. Said He, “Think ye that 
these Galileans were sinners above all the Galileans, because 
they have suffered these things? I tell you, Nay; but, ex- 
cept ye repent, ye shall all in like manner perish.” It would 
not do for Jesus’ hearers to point to this incident, of the 


252 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


ruthless slaughter by Pilate, to prove that those that thus 
suffer have sinned greviously. All Galileans were sinners. 
A national doom was impending over back-slidden Israel. 

Jesus cited another case to add weight to His prophecy 
of coming judgment upon Jerusalem. A tower, apparently 
on the top of Ophel, near the Fountain of the Virgin op- 
posite Siloam, had fallen....and eighteen men had been 
buried beneath it; in the opinion of the people, as a judg- 
ment of God, for their having helped the sacrilegious 
undertaking of Pilate, who was bringing water to the Holy 
City. 

Jesus saw in the hated Romans God’s chastening rod for 
recalcitrant Jerusalem. Repentance was urged. “Except 
ye repent—except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish!” 
The alternatives were national repentance or national perish- 
Ing. 

And lest Israel would interpret the Master’s words as 
suggestive of impatience on the part of the God of Israel, 
He spake the parable of the fig-tree. (6-9.) 

To cut down a fig-tree or a palm or an olive-tree which 
yielded ever so little fruit was to deserve death from the 
hand of God, according to the popular notion, so valuable 
were these trees. Hence the tree of the parable must have 
been hopeless or its owner would never have given the order, 
“Cut it down.” Of this tree, “regarded as the most fruit- 
ful of all trees’? (Edersheim), when it bears, it was indig- 
nantly asked “‘Why does it also cumber the ground?” It is 
pointed out that this barren fig-tree would be a threefold 
disadvantage: “it would yield no fruit; it would fill valu- 
able space, which a fruit-bearer might occupy; it would 
needlessly deteriorate the land.” 

In Joel 1: 7 the fig-tree is emblematic of the Jewish nation. 
God had planted Israel in a favoured spot in His vineyard. 
But when “He came seeking fruit thereon and found none,” 
He, in utter disappointment, bade His vinedresser the Mes- 
siah, ‘Cut it down.” But He entreated, “Lord, let it alone 
this year also, till I dig about it and dung it,” etc. One more 
chance for Jehovah’s fig-tree, Israel. Would the favored 
tree respond to Messianic care? “If it bear.... fruit, well; 
but if not, thou shalt cut it down.” 


PEREAN MINISTRY 256 


History and Scripture relate how irresponsive was the 
specially cultivated fig-tree. ‘He came unto his own 
and his own received Him not.” With one voice Israel 
cried out “We will not have this man reign over us.” 
“Away with him!’”; “Give us Barabbas.’’ The seditionists 
preferred a seditionist. But sentence against an evil work 
was not executed speedily. All the Galileans and they of 
Jerusalem “perished,” but only after divine patience had 
exhausted all of heaven’s resources to woo and win, to 
redeem. 


§ 97. Bae Woman Healed on a Sabbath. (Luke 13: 
10-21.) 


This section divides itself into two parts: (1) Jesus makes 
use of the Sabbath day, and (2) because He makes use of 
this ae the ruler of the synagogue criticizes Him. vs. 
10-17. 

Jesus was a real hero. Jesus made use of the Sabbath 
day. He conformed to the institutions of His day except 
when conformity would violate His well established prin- 
ciples. 

I. Jesus makes use of the Sabbath day. 

When our Saviour was on earth, He availed Himself of 
the institutions and occasions presented to Him, in order 
that He might do good. The synagogue was the Jewish 
institution which seems to have originated about the time 
of the captivity, when the Jews did not have access to the 
Temple. Jesus frequented the synagogues and as oppor- 
tunity afforded, used them as a channel of blessing to the 
people who congregated. The Sabbath also was the holy 
day of the week in the time of Jesus just as our Lord’s day, 
or Sunday, is now. 

When Jesus was in one of these synagogues on a certain 
Sabbath, a woman, deformed, came. One verse of our 
Scripture states that she “had a spirit of infirmity,” and 
another place says, ‘““whom Satan hath bound.” Satan had 
such control of this poor woman that she could not lift 
herself up. She is an example of so many in the world 
today who are bound down by Satan, whose business it is 
to lower men rather than lift them up. 


254 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


When Jesus saw the woman, He recognized her condition, 
and, calling her to Himself, said, “Woman, thou art loosed 
from thy infirmity.” ‘The Son of God is aware of the phys- 
ical, mental and spiritual infirmities of the world and His 
attitude toward them is the same as, twenty centuries ago, 
it was to this unfortunate creature. Jesus came to free men 
who had been bound and so He would loose us that we 
might live a happy and successful physical life, that our 
minds might be unhampered, and our spirits might bei buoy- 
ant in the Lord, 

Not only did He speak to this woman, but He laid His 
hands upon her and at once she straightened up, and glori- 
fied God. In this incident we note His coming into con- 
tact with this woman who needed His power, just as today 
He longs to come into contact with all need. His presence 
changed her completely and immediately, and so His touch 
in the life makes for a quick transformation. She did not 
thank Him, according to the narrative, but glorified God, 
thus recognizing that what He did was done in the power 
of God. 

As we view this incident, we note that Christ was so 
practical with His power that He healed the needy person 
while He had opportunity. Is this not a good lesson for 
the ministers of the Lord today? We should not be so upon 
our dignity that we are unwilling to minister directly and 
practically in time of need. Opportunities seldom, if ever, 
repeat themselves. When we see the soul bowed, we should 
aim to get that soul in contact with Christ at once. If 
the needy world today would come in contact with the 
Christ of power, what a transformation there would be and 
how glad we would be. Ere long He will come in Person 
to straighten out this world so bent and bowed with in- 
firmities and sin. 

II. The Ruler of the Synagogue criticizes Jesus’ work 
on the Sabbath. 

Evidently the bent woman walking in an erect position 
and glorifying God, directed the attention of the crowd. 
The ruler of the synagogue, being jealous of his position, 
became indignant with Jesus. He criticized Him for hav- 
ing healed on the Sabbath day. He classified what Jesus 


eee - 


PEREAN MINISTRY 255 


had done as work, and told Jesus that all work should be 
done on six days. He told the woman and all others that 
they should come for healing on any day of the week but 
the Sabbath. In all this evidently he acted quite foolishly. 
How narrow he was. Jesus did not do this as work, neither 
would Jesus be bound by the traditions of the synagogue. 
At once the Lord pointed out to him that he was hypocritical. 
He was not going according to his own best judgment in 
the matter, but simply said what he did because of his 
anger. 

Our Lord pointed out to this unwise Ruler of the syna- 
gogue that on the Sabbath day men are merciful with ani- 
mals. ‘They do not permit the ox and the ass to stand in 
the stall on the Sabbath day without water, but they lead 
them forth to the watering place. The Ruler of the syna- 
gogue knew of these works and doubtless approved, and had 
he but thought honestly, he could not have condemned Jesus 
for being merciful to a human being that had been bound 
for eighteen years. 

Jesus’ question as to whether or not this daughter of 
Abraham should have been loosed, caused His adversaries 
to be ashamed. They had good reason to be ashamed since 
their criticism of Christ was unjust and their reason child- 
ish. It has ever been so when men have taken the issue 
with the Son of God. Jesus was the Truth and so could 
not do otherwise than what was consistent with the truth. 
As He is seen in the perspective of nineteen centuries men 
declare that He was a miracle. Yet there are those today 
who put their own judgment up against His clear teaching. 
Is it any wonder that they soon come to shame? But the 
people round about rejoiced in the glorious things which 
He did. If the people of our day could only see Jesus 
working, they would believe. Many of them do see and 
do believe. Let us give Him the opportunity to work that 
many may believe. We note from this section of the 
Scriptures that when we fulfil our ministry as faithful serv- 
ants of the Lord, we will help those who need help but 
we are certain to incur the enmity and criticism of a certain 
professional class that lacks the power of God. Let us not 
be daunted in our work, but boldly strike out for the right 
and in the right, and so fulfill our mission. 


256 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 98. The Question Whether Few Are Saved. (Luke 
13: 22-30.) 


Christ is travelling from Galilee to Jerusalem, which is in 
Judea, and He evidently crosses over into Perea and crosses 
back again. The places are not named along the way, but 
apparently He took His time and went rather leisurely on 
this journey. As He goes to these cities and villages, a 
certain one says to Him “Lord, are they few that be saved ?” 
You notice that this question, though asked by one, was 
answered to many, Jesus said unto them. Probably the 
questioner was curious, and Jesus, we can fancy, turns to 
answer the question, but takes the opportunity to tell the 
people something which He thinks they ought to have. 


Notice what He gives to them. ‘Strive to enter in by 
the narrow door: for many, I say unto you, shall seek to 
enter in and shall not be able.” Doubtless here you have 
the Messianic Kingdom under the figure of the palace, and 
into this palace, of course, men ought to come. The master 
of the house is probably seated at the head of his banquet- 
ing table and there are two entrances. There is the mag- 
nificent portal, the front entrance, and then there is the 
narrow door, or a postern gate, and Jesus bids them enter 
in by striving, through the narrow door, or postern gate. 
We are exhorted to do this. The reference as we under- 
stand it is to Christ, who is the only way. Christ is the 
door, and if you would come into this magnificent palace of 
the Lord, you must come by means of the narrow door and 
you must strive to enter into it. There must be humuliation. 
You must tread the way that Jesus trod. This speaks of the 
humiliation of Christ, and so this gate represents the lowly 
Messiah as the way, the truth and the life. 


He says further that there are those that shall seek to 
enter and shall not be able. Many authorities bring in the 
word ‘once’ in verse 24. It probably is that when once 
the master of this house had closed the door. For there will 
come a time when the door will be shut, and prophetically 
speaking, there are those who will come, but will not be 
answered. ‘They will seek in vain. Now, of course, the 
Jews had their notion of entering in—through their own 


PEREAN MINISTRY Taba O 


way, their own ritual, and their own sacrifices, but that was 
not the way. Christ became the door of entering, and when 
they rejected Him they rejected the entrance. 

They will petition Him. These words are simply as 
words of one rejecting those who strive to come in. ‘Then 
there shall be wailing or weeping, which expresses despair, 
and gnashing, which expresses rage. 

Those who rejected Him and sought to come in by their 
own way are thieves and robbers. He is the door, the 
postern gate, and they were not going to enter that way and 
hence there will be those who will supplant them, from the 
east and west, and from the north and south, and they will 
get the place with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. 

‘And behold,” the startling thing is, “there are last which 
shall be first and there are first which shall be last.” Take 
Galatians and Romans as commentary on this particular 
section. 


§ 99. Reply to the Warning Against Herod. (Luke 
13: 31-35). 


This to me is one of the most colorful incidents in the 
New Testament. Herod Antipas (ruler of Perea) here is 
presented in a disturbed state of mind. ‘Herod would fain 
kill thee.” Doubtless Herod’s disturbance was due to the 
fact that the professed Messiah was in Herod’s dominion, 
and he had been guilty of killing John the Baptist, one 
prophet, and was not eager to kill Jesus, another prophet. 
However, he was not willing to have the disturbance in his 
kingdom either. 

Weare challenged by the solicitude of the Pharisees. “In 
that hour.” Why were they so solicitous for the safety of 
Christ? See Mark 3:6. There you have a warning against 
the Herodians and Pharisees. The Pharisees were eager 
to get rid of Him from their own religious standpoint, and 
get Him into Judea where He would be under the control 
of the Jews. 

Now Jesus calls Herod a fox, v. 32. Jesus is here 
accusing Herod of being an intriguer—being foxy. 

What did He tell them? ‘Tell them I have certain things 
to do—cast out devils and cure people.” ‘The third day I 

17 


258 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


am perfected.” Probably means “I am finished,” or maybe 
“T am here for just a short time.” 

Notice further that He says, “It cannot be that a prophet 
perish out of Jerusalem.’ That is probably irony, for He 
goes on to say, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killeth the 
prophets, and stoneth them that are sent unto thee!” Just 
as though that is what Jerusalem was in the habit of doing. 
That is rather an accusation. It isn’t true that it would 
kill all the prophets, but in general Jerusalem has been in 
the prophet-killing business. Jerusalem had a monopoly 
on killing prophets. 

‘How often would I have gathered thy children together 
even as a hen gathereth her brood under her wings, and 
ye would not.” ‘This is an apostrophe—addressing them as 
though they were present. (Jesus was not in Jerusalem. ) 
A great crowd was always following Jesus, and in this 
crowd there were Jews who would convey this message to 
Jerusalem. Jesus knew that He was soon to leave the 
earth, and He was solicitous for His own people. He was 
sent unto the Jews. 

Said Jesus, ‘““How often would I”....“And ye would 
not.” “Thelo” (Greek), “I wish,” is used. Although Jesus 
would and as ye would not, then it is not done. Evidently 
this Scripture teaches that there is a possibility of reject- 
ing the offers of mercy and grace and going counter to 
Jesus’ will. 

“Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” “Deso- 
late’ is ‘“eremos” (Greek )—desert. Leave desolate out and 
see what you have. Imagine what that means for them. 
They did not know that they were turning down their best. 
When France drove out the Huguenots, she tapped her artery 
and let flow her life blood. When Christ was rejected by 
the Jews they were left alone. He says, “Ye shall not see 
me, until ye shall say, ‘Blessed is he that cometh in the 
name of the Lord.’”’ 

Jesus again used this as an occasion to teach them. Every 
once in a while someone said something to Him and He 
used these opportunities to declare some particular truth. 


PEREAN MINISTRY 259 


§ 100. Discourse At a Chief Pharisee’s Table. (Luke 
14: 1-24.) 


One of the marvels of the teaching of Christ was the 
emphasis» He put upon certain things which were either 
despised or ignored by other great teachers. Jesus, being 
omniscient, surveyed the whole field of knowledge and knew 
just what to stress. He prized humility. He exalted the 
lowly. With exquisite taste He appreciated the delicate 
touches in life. 

Gentile standards and ways would not do for His fol- 
lowers. He had left the glory to take His place in this poor, 
sin-defiled world and finally to die the death of the ignomin- 
ious cross. Thus He demonstrated the possibility of one’s 
humbling himself. 

I. “Before Honor Goeth Humility.” Vs. 7-11. 


Jesus’ parables were taken from life. He observed how 
selfishly guests chose out the chief places at a table. This 
“was against’ His nature. He could not be silent. True it 
is that there are times when “silence is golden,” yet evils 
should be portrayed in forceful language. Otherwise 
wickedness may stalk about disguised and unobserved. 

Jesus was specific in His instructions. He told those 
invited to a wedding not to sit down in the best seats but to 
take the lowest places. Guests may come in who in the 
estimation of the host are more deserving of the better seats. 
Then he will move the selfish, ambitious guest from his 
comfortable and honorable seat to a lower one, much to the 
humiliation of the man forced to step down. Jesus pointed 
out that if men would only take the low seats there was a 
likelihood of their being exalted by the host. ‘Then He 
laid down a principle as follows: “Whosoever exalteth him- 
self shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be 
exalted.” 

We can easily imagine that Jesus is still observing the 
greed and selfishness of men on earth. Ambition causes 
them to project their own personalities. They seek to 
gratify their own desires. They enjoy hearing their own 
voices and especially do they vie to have a prominent place 
in newspaper accounts. Now there is a legitimate interest 


260 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


that one should have in what his own name stands for, 
stands over, and stands under, but I confess that I believe 
that if Christ were to come to earth in person and dictate as 
to who should be who and where and what He would shake 
men up abit. Some that through “wire-pulling’”’ and prop- 
aganda against their brothers have climbed to a throne over 
the bodies of their more worthy, but less pugnacious fellows, 
would be brought down to dust and ashes; whereas some 
lowly, sweet, Christlike, and really strong saints would be 
put up. Well, why be restless about it? No need to be irri- 
tated. The Judgment Seat of Christ is not far distant. 
Then all will be adjusted by Him, the Great Judge. 


Then He who saw the widow’s two mites, the woman who 
anointed His feet, and the loving devotion of Mary, will 
not fail to recognize the true worth and humility of spirit. 
May God give His children grace to get down low. 

“He that humbleth himself shall be exalted.’ It is true 
also that he that humbles himself will not be humiliated. 
All others will. 

Much of the vying for place and prominence is due to 
over-estimating self. We are all too likely to think of our- 
selves more highly than we ought to think. 

But what good is a big chair if one cannot fill it? It is 
just as uncomfortable as for the little boy to sit in his 
father’s chair and have his little feet dangle above the floor. 
On the other hand, when one occupies a position for which 
he is qualified and those about him recognize him as being 
big enough for the place, how happy is the situation. The 
office should seek the man and not the man the office. 

II. Certainty of Reward for the Generous. Vs. 12-14. 

After Jesus had discoursed on taking the lowest seat He 
took occasion to instruct His host on the matter of issuing 
invitations for feasts. His advice was to invite those who 
could not invite in return. Christ taught that.the friends, 
brethren, and kinsmen, and rich neighbors should be passed 
by and the poor, the maimed, and the lame and the blind 
be invited. The proffered reward for this unusual pro- 
cedure is neatly expressed as follows, “And thou shalt be 
blessed; for they cannot recompense thee; for thou shalt 
be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.’ Jesus 


PEREAN MINISTRY 261 


advocated ministering to those who cannot help themselves 
and assured us that in compensation for this we shall be 
rewarded at the resurrection of the just. This is not only 
a challenge to us to aid the unfortunate of society, but a 
challenge to our faith in the resurrection of the just and 
its attendant judgment. 

If this principle were rigidly adhered to there would be 
fewer feasts, but just as happy people in the world. One 
can hardly believe that our Master would discourage eating 
and drinking with our immediate friends, but He longed 
for a generosity and hospitality that would indicate our 
sympathies extended beyond our own limited groups and 
inner circles of favorites. 

How beautiful it is when what Jesus suggests in these 
practical matters is believed and done. 


§101. Discourse on Counting the Cost. Luke 14: 25- 
35. 


Christ told the multitudes that discipleship meant re- 
nouncement of all. ‘“Hateth” means “loveth less.” (cf. 
Gen. 29:30, 31; Mat. 10:37.) “His own life” also (v. 
26) shows that selfishness is incompatible with following 
the Master. Hence He advises them to be as prudent as the 
builder who “sits down and counts the cost” or the warrior 
who “sits down and counsels.” The savour of the salt of 
Christianity is renouncement of all. Sacrifice is the season- 
ing of salvation and service. He counsels that “A reserved 
attitude is less to be criticized than open profession followed 
by declension.” 


§ 102. The Three Parables of Grace. Luke 15. 


These were spoken to reply to the charge of the Pharisees 
and scribes: “This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with 
them.” Herein does the “Good Shepherd” declare that God 
in Christ became a Seeking Saviour. The two prominent 
features of each parable are (a) “the lost” and (b) the 
joy upon finding. ‘The sheep, the coin and the son are all 
lost. So the race is lost. Some like the sheep are so 
lost that they realize it, yet could never find their way 


262 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


home to the bosom of the Great Shepherd. The lost sheep 
bespeaks the need of a real Shepherd. The son suggests 
how there is need of repentance on the part of the sinner. 

The Prodigal Son. ‘This parable has been called “the 
crown and pearl of all Christ’s parables.” Horace Greeley 
said, “If there could be only one page in the Bible, I should 
choose that the single page should contain this parable.” 
But it is well for us to note that this parable sets forth only 
one phase of redemption and that the divine work in re- 
demption, the suffering and the toil are abundantly illus- 
trated in the going out of the shepherd for the lost sheep 
and the searching by the woman for the lost coin.—Abbott. 
Here we have set forth the sinner’s plight and acceptance 
after a wilful straying. 

When the Shepherd finds the sheep “he layeth it upon 
his shoulders, rejoicing.”’ Then he calls together his friends 
to celebrate the finding. When the woman by diligent seek- 
ing has found the lost coin she calleth together her lady 
friends and neighbors to rejoice over the fact that the lost 
coin has been found. When the son, lost by leaving the 
parental roof and renouncing the father’s guidance, has 
returned and been received by the running, rejoicing father, 
there is the banquet to celebrate. 

The elder brother, like the Pharisee, is on the ground, just, 
by contrast, to emphasize the forgiveness and gladness 
of the Father’s heart. At the close of the Parable of the 
Lost Sheep, Jesus said, “There shall be joy in heaven over 
one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine 
just persons, which need no repentance.” (v. 7.) At the 
close of that of the Lost Coin Jesus said, “There is joy in 
the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that 
repenteth.” (v. 10.) 

At the close of the Parable of the Prodigal Son no such 
statement is made. Why repeat what is so evident? As 
the Father’s heart was happy over the son’s safety, so God’s 
great heart rejoices over the sinner’s return. 


OUTLINE ON THE PARABLE OF THE PRODIGAL 


Jesus’ experience with the publican and servant on the 
one hand and that of the Pharisees and scribes on the other 


PEREAN MINISTRY 263 


provide the occasion for these parables. As has been said 

before, the point of the parables is the rejoicing over the 

lost when it is found. Evidently this rejoicing was occa- 

sioned because of the value of that which was found. 
Considerations. 


1. The Prodigal. 
(a) wantonness, v. 12. 
(b) wealth, v. 12b. 
(c) waste, v. 13. 
(d) want, v. 14. 
(e) work, v. 15. 
(f{) woe, v. 16. 
(g) will, v. 18. 
2. The Father. 
(h) welcome, vs. 20-24. 
Note the space given to the welcome in Luke’s 
human gospel. 
3. The Elder Son. 
(1) work, vs. 25, 29. 
(j) wrath, v. 28. 


The elder son of the parable stands for the Pharisees and 
scribes. He represents faithfulness as is seen by the fact 
that he was serving his father in the field, but he sulked when 
he might have enjoyed the banquet. So the Pharisees and 
scribes could not appreciate the forgiving grace of Christ 
who represents the Father’s attitude toward the prodigals 
of the race. 


§ 103. Two Parables of Warning. Luke, 16. 


The parable of the Unjust Steward teaches how men 
use money as a means of making friends. They put others 
under obligations to themselves by a wise use of money. 
Here the steward got the approval of his lord who was 
about to accuse him of wasting. “For sons of this world 
are wiser than sons of light.” The point is to appreciate 
values. Unjust steward began to value commodities. We 
should value the “good’’ in spiritual and eternal things. 
This lord saw a valuable prudence in his steward. ‘The 


264 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Master bids us look to the future, to invest in eternal secu- 
rities. Our goods should be laid on the altar that we may 
have “an abundant entrance.” Trust not in riches but use 
them as means to a desired end. If mammon, greed, be 
your God, then Jehovah will be slighted. 


Our earthly goods should be so dispensed that souls 
through its use will be saved. Money that is given to mis- 
sions will mean the salvation of souls who one day will re- 
ceive us into “eternal tabernacles.”’ So this parable teaches 
that the best use that we can make of our money is to use 
it so that others may be brought to Christ. 


This teaching grated on the ears of the lucre-loving, hypo- 
critical Pharisees who lacked that dash that comes from 
genuineness. So Jesus told them that they were “behind 
the times.” Their religion was an anachronism. They 
should “‘violently” enter into it “the Kingdom of God.” 
This is consistent with law-keeping as verse 17 shows. 
This reality will do away with looseness in morals and 
matrimonial matters. 


Then follows the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. 
The rich man failed to ‘make friends by means of the 
mammon of unrighteousness” so when he “failed”’ there was 
no one to receive him into eternal tabernacles.” “This par- 
able is not an allegory, like the parable of the sower, but is 
rather a representative or illustrative story, like that of the 
good Samaritan, or unjust steward, in which ‘every par- 
ticular of each one of them may have been historical.’ ’— 
Sadler. ‘The circumstances of the story must be exactly 
according to facts, and picture out the real state of things, 
as Christ always does in His parables. As from the parables 
of the sheep, the steward, the wedding-feast, we may learn 
the customs of that day, so from this parable we may learn 
the truth about the other world and its relation to this. 
It is the parting of the veil that hides the other world from 
this, giving a momentary glimpse of the realities beyond.— 
Peloubet. As these quotations indicate, the Lord Jesus by 
this parable lets us know of the life beyond the grave, and 
the results of failing to use our earthly possessions for His 
glory. | 


PEREAN MINISTRY 265 


§ 104. Concerning Forgiveness and Faith. Luke 17: 
1-10. 


This section by vivid illustrative language portrays the 
Christian life in the ideal as a life of (a) blamelessness— 
no occasion of stumbling given (1, 2); (b) forgiveness— 
even seven times in a day (4); (c) faithfulness as (1) 
belief in God’s power and (2) fidelity in His service (5-10). 


§105. The Raising of Lazarus. John 11: 1-46. 


The story of the raising of Lazarus is one which makes 
evident the power of our Lord over death and thus mani- 
fests his heroic nature, but it also shows him to be tender 
and sympathetic with those whom he loves, and portrays 
him to be perfectly human. As Lazarus grew ill Mary and 
Martha naturally thought of Jesus who had been their guest 
and friend. The close relationship of Jesus and Lazarus is 
expressed in the message sent to Christ. “Lord, behold he 
whom thou lovest is sick.” Jesus receiving the message 
seemed to draw on His divine knowledge when he said, ““This 
sickness is not unto death but for the glory of God, that 
the Son of God may be glorified thereby.” Thus he pre- 
dicted the resurrection of Lazarus. But the particular state- 
ment, ““This sickness is not unto death” (v. 4) seems diffi- 
cult in view of the fact that Lazarus did die, but the very 
natural explanation is that Jesus meant that the sickness of 
Lazarus was not for the purpose of death but rather that 
God might be glorified through His Son being glorified in 
bringing the dead man to life. 

A superficial reader would find difficulty in this narrative 
in reading that Jesus loved Martha and her sister and 
Lazarus and then reading that when Jesus heard that Laz- 
arus was sick he stayed where He was two days. He seemed 
to be in no hurry. It is as though He was depending on 
those whom He loved to afford Him the opportunity of 
doing a great work by which God might be glorified. But 
finally He would start into Judea, though the disciples would 
have prevented Him for fear of the Jews, but He was walk- 
ing in the light and feared not. 

Then, knowing that Lazarus had died, He said, “Our 


266 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


friend Lazarus has fallen asleep,’ etc. The disciples did 
not realize that He spoke of Lazarus’ death, so Jesus used 
the strong expression, “Lazarus is dead,” and said plainly, 
“YT am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the in- 
tent that ye may believe.” So though Jesus loved Martha 
and Mary and Lazarus, and naturally would have spared 
them any grief, yet He permitted Lazarus to die that faith 
might be implanted in the hearts of the disciples. Upon 
arriving at Bethany near Jerusalem Jesus found many Jews 
consoling Martha and Mary. Martha in her accustomed 
earnestness hastened down, greeting Jesus with the words 
which must have seemed to him like an accusation of re- 
missness, “If thou hadst been here my brother had not 
died.” Yet, hope and faith tried to illuminate the darkness 
of her sorrow and she added, “Even now I know that what- 
soever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee.” Then 
Jesus took pains to explain to Martha that not in the distant 
future but at that very time He was the resurrection and 
the life. Martha signifies her faith that Jesus is the Christ 
and Son of God. 


Then Martha calls Mary, her sister, who in keeping with 
her character “‘sat still in the house.” Mary, obeying the 
call of the Master, rose quickly and went unto Him, fol- 
lowed by the Jews who were sorrowing with her. Mary 
who so much loved to sit at Jesus’ feet, at this time “fell 
down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been 
here my brother had not died.” We can forgive the sisters 
for believing that the Lord should have come to their home 
earlier and we are sure the Master did not chide Mary but 
rather “groaned in spirit and was troubled.” We interpret 
this as meaning that Jesus deeply sympathized with Mary. 
Edersheim, quoting Canon Westcott, observes, ‘“The mir- 
acles of the Lord were not wrought by a simple word of 
power but that in the Master was the element of sympathy 
unto them. . He took away the sicknesses and diseases of 
men in some sense by taking them unto Himself.” This 
famous student of the life of Christ here speaks of “that 
theanthropic fellow-suffering which was both vicarious and 
redemptive.” 

Christ was perfectly human and called upon His heavenly 


PEREAN MINISTRY 267 


power to aid His friends. His question was, ‘““Where have 
they laid him?” Here is the record of the Master’s tears, 
“Jesus wept.” The Jews there present knew that Jesus 
loved him and even they were ready to believe that He who 
had “opened the eyes of him that was blind, could have 
caused that this man should not have died.” Then follows 
in verse 38 a statement that Jesus “groaning in himself, 
cometh to the tomb.’ Doubtless this groaning was the 
expression of a deep feeling. He sympathized with the 
grief of his friends and probably resented the unbelief that 
was implied in the words that Jesus could have caused this 
man not to die, but stopped there. Jesus intended to demon- 
strate that He could bring this man to life. Then follows 
the narrative how that they were bidden to take away the 
stone and then again the words of the protesting Martha. 
Jesus “lifted up his eyes” and prayed to the Father and then 
cried with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth.’ Lazarus 
did come forth and the result was that many of the Jews 
that were present believed, but some went to the Pharisees, 
the avowed enemies of Christ. 

There are in this raising of Lazarus some practical les- 
sons : 

(a) He was dead, as all are spiritually dead until quick- 
erecta i pi. 2 tl. 

(b) Jesus spake and he had life. So we receive spir- 
itual life. John 10:10. 

(c) He was bound hand and foot and voice. That is, he 
could not work, walk nor speak. We can imagine the result 
had he continued in that bound state. He surely would have 
gained no strength but would have atrophied. 

(d) Jesus’ exhortation was “loose him and let him go.” 
How important this exhortation that he may work for and 
fellowship with his sisters and be a blessing to his fellows. 
So we must not forget the application that when we have 
received spiritual life then we must have the napkin taken 
from off the mouth that we might talk for the Master and 
that our hands may be unbound that we may work for the 
Master, 


268 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


§ 106. The Withdrawal to Ephraim. John 11: 47-54. 


The report of the raising of Lazarus caused the Pharisees 
to gather a council and ask themselves the question, ‘What 
do we?” and to make the statement, “This man doeth many 
miracles.’”” The Pharisees realized that if Jesus succeeded 
their religious position was lost. Said they, “If we let him 
thus alone, all men will believe on him.” ‘They felt that the 
Romans would come and do away with the Jewish leaders 
if this Jesus continued by his matchless works and words to 
cast a reflection on their outworn religion. But there spoke 
from their midst one Caiaphas who was high priest that year 
and said that they should know “that one should die for the 
people that the whole nation perish not.” As high priest 
“he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation,” and 
John interpreting this adds “and not for that nation only, 
but that also he might gather together into one the people 
of God that are scattered abroad.’”’ So here we see the 
malignity of the Pharisees, the worldly wisdom of the high 
priest of the Jews and God’s great purpose that the cruci- 
fixion of Jesus through the Pharisees would mean the gath- 
ering together of the children of God that were scattered 
abroad throughout the whole world. Then and there “they 
took counsel that they might put him to death.’”’ Therefore 
Jesus withdrew from the Jews to a city of Ephraim with 
the disciples, 


§107. The Ten Lepers. Luke 17: 11-19. 


The healing of the ten lepers, but the return of only one 
glorifying God and giving thanks, and the significant ques- 
tion of Jesus, ““Were there not ten cleansed, but where are 
the nine?” and “They were not found that returned to give 
glory to God save this stranger,”—all this teaches us 


1. The grace of gratitude, and 
2. The baseness of ingratitude. 


They were all cleansed as they went but one and only one 
returned to give thanks. The following is a general though 
inexact statement of something that really occurred which 
indicates the ingratitude of the race. A boat was wrecked 


PEREAN MINISTRY 269 


on one of the Great Lakes. An experienced swimmer present 
plunged into the cold water and hauled in one after another 
until he saved thirty lives. He was unable to complete his 
task without being given personal attention through rub- 
bings, but as soon as he had recovered from the cold and the 
exhaustion incident to the perilous work, he would plunge 
into the water again. Thus he hazarded his life to save the 
thirty. Dr. Torrey, learning of this, spoke of it frequently 
in his evangelistic addresses. One day in California, Dr. 
Torrey was telling the story when an old man rose and said 
he was the man who was the subject of the story. Where- 
upon Dr. Torrey asked him to tell what in his judgment was 
the most interesting part about it, and he replied that it was 
the fact that not one of the thirty thanked him for saving 
their lives. 

This reminds us of Shakespeare’s well-known lines in 
As You Like It: 


“Blow, blow, thou winter wind 
Thou art not so unkind 

As man’s ingratitude. 

Thy tooth is not so keen, 
Because thou art not seen, 
Although thy breath be rude. 


“Freeze, freeze, thou bitter sky, 
Thou dost not bite so nigh 

As benefits forgot; 

Though thou the waters warp 
Thy sting is not so sharp 

As friend remember’d not.” 


§ 108. The Coming of the Kingdom. Luke 17: 20-18: 8. 


The Pharisees keep hounding the Master. Here they are 
inquiring as to the time of the coming of the kingdom of 
God. Jesus with infinite patience and characteristic courtesy 
takes time to reply. His statements’ summaries are as fol- 
lows: 

1. The kingdom will not come so that it can be seen by 
them. Jesus here referred to the invisibility of the kingdom. 
“The kingdom of God is within you,” or to use that other 
possible translation, ‘in the midst of you.” At that very 
time the Pharisees were unable to observe the king before 
their eyes and how could they be expected to appreciate the 


270 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


presence of the kingdom? So regardless of our belief in the 
sudden coming of the kingdom of Christ on earth, we must 
all believe in this kingdom that cometh not with observation ; 
this is near and spiritual and present. 

2. There will come a day when the visible kingdom will 
be upon the earth before men are aware of it. It will be as 
a flash of lightning (v. 24). 

3. In a particular sense this dispensation of grace is a 
manifestation of the kingdom of God. It is “one of the 
days of the Son of man” (v. 22). 

4. The kingdom is not confined to any particular place. 
So we should not heed those who say, “Lo, there!” or “Lo, 
here! v.25): 

5. The coming of the kingdom will be revealed suddenly 
as verses 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 indicate. The antediluvians 
could not realize that there would be the sudden closing of 
the ark and they would be exposed to the flood. Compare 
Eccles. 8:11 and 1 Thes. 5. 

6. The laws and principles of the kingdom will be unre- 
lenting (vs. 32, 35). As Lot’s wife lost her life so some 
will be left and lost when the kingdom comes in. To the 
particular inquiry as to where those would be taken that 
were caught up, Jesus replies, “Where the body is, there will 
the eagles be gathered together.” The evident meaning of 
which is that Christ will, as a magnet, attract to Himself 
those who are prepared to go to Him at the rapture. Just 
as vultures are attracted to a carcass, so those will be at- 
tracted to Him who comes in the clouds for them. 

Then Jesus as usual began to teach a very important les- 
son by a parable. The object of the parable is stated defi- 
nitely “that men ought always to pray and not to faint.” 
The thought of the coming of the kingdom, the separating 
of the righteous from the wicked, should not hinder them 
in their devotions, but should rather strengthen them to 
fervency and faithfulness in prayer. The point in the par- 
able is that if this unspeakably callous and inhuman judge 
was compelled to yield to the widow’s constant entreaty, 
surely the Lord whose ear is ever open to our cry and who 
loves us as a heavenly Father, surely the Lord, our God, 
hears and will stretch forth his arm to avenge his children 


PEREAN MINISTRY 271 


who pray to him, and especially so because “he is long suf- 
fering for them” (v. 7). 

Then Jesus raises the question, “When the Son of man 
cometh shall he find the faith on the earth?” ‘The reference 
is here evidently made to the clearly well defined body of 
truth that has to do with kingdom teaching. 


§ 109. The Pharisee and the Publican. Luke 18: 9-14. 


This simple parable portrays to us two distinct and definite 
types of men with respect to prayer. The Pharisee, self- 
sufficient in his own religious regard, and highly esteeming 
himself by his very posture (“stood and prayed”) and 
aloofness (“with himself”) is the quintessence of impeni- 
tence even in his attitude and form of prayer. As he says 
himself, he has nothing to confess and so simply thanks God 
that he is “not as the rest of men,” and he seems especially 
glad that he is not as the publican, whose humiliation is evi- 
denced by his attitude. The publican lacks the brazen, self- 
complacent religiosity of the Pharisee and so in most humble 
mien stood afar off with downcast eyes and he smote upon 
his breast uttering the penitential, “God be merciful to me, 
a sinner.”’ 

We hardly think it is necessary to interject that which all 
believe, that it is good to be moral. The lesson of this par- 
able, clearly stated, is that man should not trust in himself 
and set all others at naught, for of the publican it is said, 
“This man went down to his house justified, rather than the 
other.” Self-exaltation is followed by humiliation and 
humiliation by exaltation. 


$110. Concerning Divorce. Mat. 19: 3-12; Mark 10: 


As Jesus in His Perean ministry approached Jerusalem 
the Pharisees gave Him no rest. They were ever asking him 
questions, “tempting him.” They had decided that He 
should die according to the advice of Caiaphas in order to 
save the Jewish nation, but their consciences doubtless 
troubled them and so they are compelled to “make a case 
against him.” So they would discuss divorce with Him. 


Lhe CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


I. The question. Matthew states that they asked, “Is it 
lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?” 
Mark has simply, “Is it lawful for a man to put away his 
wife?” ‘That was the question. Should divorce be granted? 

II. The answer. Jesus takes some pains in discussing 
this subject, yet He is very definite and direct in His state- 
ments. 

1. He showed that male and female are complementary 
(vs. 4, 5), since God had from the beginning made them 
male and female, and since Jesus evidently thought of one 
man for one woman, it was very important that a man 
should leave his father and mother for his wife since the 
two became one flesh. Jesus here not only insisted upon the 
indissolubility of marriage, but also hinted at the physical 
and mental interdependence of man and woman. 

2. Marriage is a divine institution (v.6). Since God has 
joined why should man undo what God has done? So 
Christ insists that the ideal should become the actual. 

3. Divorce is a man-made alternative (vs. 7,8). When 
the Pharisees cited Moses they felt they had gained their 
point, but they missed it when they said, “Moses commanded 
to give a bill of divorcement.” Jesus would not allow that 
Moses had commanded but explained, ‘““Moses for your hard- 
ness of heart suffered you to put away your wives but from 
the beginning it was not so.” What Moses did was to give 
permission to them because of their obtuse, insensate hearts. 

4. Christ’s ground for divorce (v. 9). Jesus did make 
one exception and that was fornication. He also pointed 
out that the man who divorces his wife and marries again 
would not simply himself be guilty of adultery but make 
another man liable to adultery, by divorcing this woman 
who would likely marry again. 

5. Those able not to marry (vs. 10-12). The Pharisees 
were silenced temporarily but the eager disciples went in 
search of further truth. Their concern was as to whether 
it is advisable for one to marry since a divorce is wrong 
except in one case and since incompatibility, etc., is likely 
to be present. But then Jesus pointed out that not all men 
are able not to marry. He implied that single life would 
be greater hardship for most men than unsatisfactory mar- 


PEREAN MINISTRY 273 


riage. Then He spoke of those three classes of eunuchs: 
the highest in character being those who have “made them- 
selves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” ‘Then he 
advised, “He that is able to receive it let him receive it.” 
The disciples had been instructed and if none from their 
group were able to receive the same, certainly Paul was one 
_ of the characters whose heart was so enthusiastic for the 
spreading of the Gospel that he was able to receive it. Cf. 
Cor. 7: 


§111. Christ Blessing Little Children. Mat. 19: 13- 
15; Mark 10: 13-16; Luke 18: 15-17. 


The incident of Christ blessing little children “probably 
occurred in the same house where the disciples had ques- 
tioned Christ about His teaching on the divinely sacred in- 
stitution of marriage.”—Edersheim. ‘This instruction rela- 
tive to the children aptly follows that on marriage. This is 
a scene expressing the Master’s sweetness, gentleness and 
tenderness. The above-named author believes that the Christ 
who blesses the children is entirely unlike what Jewish legend 
would have invented for its Messiah. But from what we 
have learned of Jesus we can surely have imagined that 
the Jewish mothers would have brought their children to 
Him. They knew of His holiness and were eager to have 
His hand laid upon the heads of their children in blessing. 
But lo, “the disciples rebuked them.” ‘The word for rebuke 
here implies that they did not convince them, however, that 
they should not bring their children to Jesus. But Jesus 
stood up for the mothers and children. 


His “suffer the little children to come unto me and for- 
bid them not’’.has been used countless times as myriads of 
infants have been presented to the Lord by devoted parents. 
For says He, “of such is the kingdom of heaven.” And 
Mark is more explicit than Matthew for Mark expresses 
that the kingdom of heaven shall be received as a little child 
would receive it. Jesus clearly asserts “‘that there need be 
no intellectual greatness.” The humble, even the feeble- 
minded, may receive the kingdom. So Jesus “took them in 


his arms and blessed them, laying his hands upon them.” 
18 


274 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Surely as He fondly folded these babes to His bosom He 
was thinking not simply of them, but He was praying that 
His disciples would be “followers of God, as dear children.” 


§112. The Rich Young Ruler. Mat. 19: 16-20: 16; 
Mark 10:17-31; Luke 18: 18-30. 


The interview between this one and the Master is fraught 
with interest. It has been pointed out that the questioner in 
asking, “What good thing shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ 
displays great ignorance, since we do not do anything to 
inherit, but if one is interested in eternal life, we could ex- 
cuse him for not being careful in his selection of terms. The 
question asked by Jesus, “Why callest thou me good?” and 
his statement, ‘““None is good save one, God,” have been 
taken to prove that Jesus here did not profess to be God. 
It would seem that Matthew’s Gospel which has, “Why 
asketh thou me concerning that which is good?” would re- 
move any difficulty. The Cambridge Bible takes the posi- 
tion that whichever reading we prefer, the truth of our 
Lord’s answer is to cause reflection. Jesus is saying, “In 
a single breath thou hast twice used the word good; think 
what good really means. Am I then the One good?” Jesus 
refuses the title “Good Master” and leads the inquirer to 
reflect upon the only One who could be called good in the 
true sense. This might be interpreted to assert that Jesus 
is challenging this young man to recognize that He is God; 
if God is the only good one and if Jesus is given that title 
then the logic is inevitable; He is God. The Greek word 
used (agathos) expresses the absolute idea of moral good- 
ness. 


The Lord answers the young man by telling him to keep 
the commandments and cites him the second table of the 
decalogue which refers to his duty to man. The young man 
asserted, ‘‘All these things I have observed.” Probably he 
had done so according to his estimate of things. Then he 
inquired as to what he yet lacked. What he really lacked 
was, of course, the riches of approbation of heaven. Rich 
he was in things earthly but poor in things heavenly. Yet 
pathetic it is that he was unwilling to exchange the riches 


PEREAN MINISTRY 275 


of earth for those of heaven, and he left the Master with 
sorrowful heart. 

Then Jesus took occasion from this experience with the 
young man to point out the difficulty of the rich being saved 
and referred to the camel going through the needle’s eye. 
This expression was familiar to the Jews of Jesus’ day and 
is an exaggeration in keeping with eastern style. The Cam- 
bridge Bible states that it is unnecessary to say that “camel” 
is a word meaning “rope,” or that the eye of the needle is 
a so-called gate. What Jesus says is that for the rich man 
to be saved is a difficulty so great as to be almost impossible. 
“Yet with God all things are possible.” 

Peter, the usual spokesman, being reminded of the pov- 
erty of the disciples, said, “Lo, we have left all and followed 
thee. What then shall we have?” Whereupon Jesus re- 
minded him that “they which have followed me in the re- 
generation . . . shall sit upon twelve thrones,” etc. Then 
the Master went on to state that any one who had forsaken 
any beloved person or object should receive one hundred- 
fold. Those that would be faithful to the Master in His 
restoration (regeneration) would be amply rewarded. Then 
in Mat. 20:1, Jesus begins a parable which was an answer 
to Peter’s question of Mat. 19:27. Jesus had said, “but 
many shall be last that are first, and first that are last.” He 
evidently meant that those who were poor on earth should 
be rich in heaven, and vice versa. He certainly implied that 
their rewards of fidelity would be ample and that He as 
King of the Kingdom was fully authorized to reward the 
faithful. 

So the parable of the householder becomes very clear. An 
agreement was made with the laborers that came early in 
the morning. A penny a day was the wage. Then others 
were brought in at the third hour, still others at the sixth, 
and at the ninth, and others at the eleventh. But when the 
day was done each one received a penny regardless of the 
time he had labored. The fact that all received the same 
but that some had worked during the heat of the day while 
others had labored just during the cool evening hour, irri- 
tated those who began early. But the householder said to 
the one that complained, “Friend, I did you no wrong. 


276 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Didst thou not agree with me for a penny?” That is justice. 
The householder reminded the complaining one that it was 
allowable for him to do what he chose with his own. Said 
he, ‘Is thine eye evil because I am good?” This means, 
“Are you envious because I am just?’ What the Master 
intended to emphasize is that time is not the only element 
of service. Thus Jesus taught that rewards would not be 
only in proportion to labor rendered but also according to 
the generosity of the Lord, Himself. 


§ 113. Christ Foretells His Crucifixion. Mat. 20: 17- 
19; Mark 10: 32-34; Luke 18: 31-34. 


Jesus for some time had said nothing of His coming 
death but as he approaches Jerusalem He is reminded of it. 
We can surely see that it was important for the disciples to 
consider the idea of crucifixion lest the hope of rewards 
should cause them to be totally unprepared for the event. 
Jesus’ crucifixion was at hand and He wanted the disciples 
to be ready for it. 


§114. The Ambition of James and John. Mat. 20: 20- 
28; Mark 10: 35-45, 


Here we have the ambition of a fond mother for her 
sons. It seems as though even James and John did not 
seriously consider the prophecy of the crucifixion. So when 
their mother asked the Master that they might have favored 
places in His Kingdom, Jesus said, “You know not what 
you ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I am about to 
drink?” Jesus then prepared to give them a lesson on the 
importance of humility in service. Let us consider this sec- 
tion under a brief outline: 

I. Wrong roads to greatness. 


1. The way of a whim. Mat. 20: 20-21. This mother 
was simply talking according to her own heart and her 
ambition for her boys. No one can ever achieve greatness 
according to Christ’s standards simply through selfish ambi- 
tion. 

2. The way of self-sufficiency (20:22). To Jesus’ ques- 
tion they replied, “We are able.” They overestimated them- 


PEREAN MINISTRY 277 


selves and so expressed an over confidence. It requires 
more than confidence in one’s powers to really be great in 
the eyes of God. 

3. The way disapproved of by the majority of the good, 
sane and reliable (20:24). The ten hearing the confident 
assertion of the two were indignant, and we believe rightly 
so. When one’s ambitions do not agree with the sanctified 
common sense of the majority he should begin to question 
his aims. We are here reminded of Rehoboam’s refusal of 
the counsel of the old man and heeding that of the young. 
2 Kings 12. 


II. Right roads to greatness. 


1. The way opposite to that taken by the rulers of the 
Gentiles. Jesus points out how they “lord it over” and 
“exercise authority over” those under them. ‘They aim to 
subdue as the expression “exercise dominion” indicates. 1 
Peter 5:3 condemns this. 

2. The way the saints have trod (20:26, 27). Accord- 
ing to this the great one is the “minister” or servant. The 
minister (diakonos) (from which we get “deacon” and 
“dean”) is the humblest ecclesiastical office, whereas the 
servant (doulos, slave) is the humblest domestic. Now the 
really great servants of mankind, as well as the saints of the 
past, have been ministers and servants. Herein is pointed 
out the proper way to receive one’s D.D. 

3. The way the Master trod (20:28). He came to serve 
even to the point of giving His life to redeem many. 


§115. The Blind Man Near Jericho. Mat. 20: 29-34; 
Mark 10: 46-52; Luke 18: 35-43. 


The jostling, noisy crowd could not drown the piteous 
pleadings of needy men when these were directed to the ears 
that are ever open to the cry of distress. His were the ears 
that heard Israel’s piercing cry in Egypt, provoked by the 
merciless lash of the cruel taskmasters. 

Even the shadow of the approaching cross could not ob- 
scure from His penetrating gaze those that were not enjoy- 
ing the blessing of sight. 

Compassionate He pushed through the heartless multitude 


278 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


until He could lay that hand, soon to be pierced with nails, 
on those, until then, useless eyes. And lo! at once the 
sight was restored and He had two more enthusiastic fol- 
lowers. 


g116. The Visit to Zaccheus. Luke 19: 1-10. 


Jesus’ dealing with Zacchzus is outstanding because on 
that occasion he stated his purpose of coming to this earth. 
The key verse of Luke expresses that “The Son of man 
came to seek and to save that which was lost.” The ac- 
count is a vivid portrayal of what occurred. Zacchzus, a 
rich chief publican, little of stature, being eager to see Jesus, 
ran on ahead of the crowd that awaited his approach and 
climbed into a tree. When Jesus came to the place where 
Zacchzeus was he looked up and bade him come down, 
clearly stating “for today I must abide at thy house.” Zac- 
chzeus did as he was bidden, and with joy received Jesus. 

The meeting of Jesus with this well-known publican pro- 
voked the criticism of the Jews. Said they, “He is gone 
in to lodge with a man who is a sinner.” On the other hand, 
Zacchzeus availed himself of the presence of the Saviour and 
said that he would give half of his goods to the poor and 
restore fourfold where he had wrongfully exacted. Where- 
upon Jesus said, “Today is salvation come to this house, 
for as much as he is also a son of Abraham.’”’ Here we 
see Jesus manifesting His broad sympathies for humanity. 
He is void of any narrow, racial provincialism. He is a 
Saviour of all lost men. He lodges with Zacchzeus in order 
to win him. “As a hunter robes himself in the deerskin to 
get nearer his game, so Christ was clothed with human form 
that he might draw nearer to all humanity.” And so we 
gaze upon Him, the loftiest specimen of mankind the race 
has produced, the fullest manifestation of divinity God has 
given to the world. 


$117. Parable of the Minae. Luke 19: 11-28. 


Reason of the Parable. 
Interest in Kingdom (vy. 11). 
Purpose of the Parable. 


PEREAN MINISTRY 279 


To show His place in the kingdom and that it was not 
imminent. 
1. That of a nobleman (eugenes—well-born). 
His descent hinted at—“Only begotten Son of 
Goud Seed ok David, etesi Mati il: T. 

. One in a place to assign responsibility (v. 13). 

. Yet not at that time so “influential.” He was “to 
receive . . . a kingdom and return.” “His 
citizens hated him,” etc. (v. 14). Jewish rejec- 
tion. Jno. 1:11. 

4, Upon returning “having received the kingdom” 

He will be powerful (v. 15). 
a. Calls for a reckoning (v. 15). 
b. Rewards the faithful (vs. 16, 17, 18, 19) 
with power. 
c. Condemns the faithless (vs. 20-26) to pov- 
erty. 
d. Destroys the rebels (v. 27). 


How prophetic of His place with respect to the kingdom 
as contained elsewhere in the Bible. 


Ww oO 


§118. Anointing of Jesus by Mary of Bethany. Mat. 
26: 6-13; Mark 14:3-9; John 11: 55-12: 11. 


We should not confuse this section with the incident de- 
scribed in Section 53. ‘There Jesus was anointed in the 
house of Simon the Pharisee; here in the house of Simon, 
the leper. Probably the two events have been confused be- 
cause the name Simon occurs in both cases. The time of 
this scene was Friday before the last Sabbath. The char- 
acters concerned are those with whom we are reasonably 
familiar. Dr. George D. Watson was fond of pointing out 
the characteristic action word or verb of each noun, and on 
this section he notes that “Lazarus stood; Martha served; 
Mary poured’; and he might have added that Judas critt- 
cized. 

Simon the leper was probably a relative of the Bethany 
family whom Jesus loved and frequently visited. While 
Martha served, Mary, seeming to understand the coming 
death of her beloved Master, took the pound of ointment 


280 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


of spikenard and anointed Jesus’ feet, wiping them with her 
_ hair. This act provoked the criticism of the disciples and 
Judas is especially pointed out by John as expressing the 
criticism. He observes the value of the ointment. It was 
three hundred dinars, equal to the value of a man’s wages 
for one year and Judas seemed to be at that time very 
solicitous for the care of the poor, but John touches the very 
heart of his purpose and says, “Now this he said, not be- 
cause he cared for the poor but because he was a thief, and 
had the bag and took away what was put therein.” 

But regardless of the criticism of any one the act of Mary 
was approved of by the Master. He asked, ‘““Why trouble 
ye the woman?” and commended her by saying ‘‘she hath 
wrought a good work on me.” The reason for Mary’s 
anointing Jesus might be summed up as follows: 

He was the guest of honor and she therefore was glad to 
pour out her savings upon Him, and perform the humble 
office of wiping His feet. 

Then what she did was prophetic for as Mark 14:8 says, 
“she hath anointed my body aforehand for the burying.” 
So it was appropriate for her to anoint the Master, since He 
would not be long with them, while the poor would be at 
hand always, and had Judas been so minded he could have 
cared for them any time. Jesus not only recognized Mary’s 
act as prophetic, but He Himself prophesied that she would 
be known wherever the Gospel was preached because of her 
pouring out of her treasure upon His person. Mary’s act 
of wholehearted, candid devotion will always be pointed out 
as a symbol of the type of Christian lives we should live. 


PART VIII 


Tue Passion WEEK 
Sunday 


§119. The Triumphal Entry. Mat. 21: 1-11; Mark 11: 
1-11; Luke 19: 29-34; John 12: 12-19, 


In this section we see Jesus given honor. He is greeted 
as though He were aking. It is interesting to consider this 
incident in the life of Christ from the historical and pro- 
phetical as well as the spiritual aspect. Christ really rode 


THE PASSION WEEK 281 


into Jerusalem as the four gospels here state and this was 
prophetic of the time when He will come as an evident 
monarch. Then each one in his own life should exalt 
Christ today and say to Him, “Hosanna in the highest.” 


1. Preparation for the triumphal entry. Mat. 21: 1-7. 


(a) “The disciples” make the preparation. v. 1. 
Discipleship always precedes loyalty to Christ. 

(b) The disciples prepared with what was at hand, 
namely, an ass and a colt. v. 2. This was 
what was available at that time so we know 
that Christ did not ride into Jerusalem upon a 
steed or a charger, but rather upon a humble 
ass’s colt. Just so the Lord has often chosen 
the weak and foolish for His own glory and 
exaltation. 

(c) Christ’s demand had priority. v.3. The ass and 
her colt were commandeered by King Jesus 
and the secular was given a sacred use. So as 
the Levites were taken “from among men,” 
God today has first claim upon the lives of his 
disciples and this is the literal meaning of 
“saint.”” It is one who belongs to the Lord 
for spiritual service. 

(d) Christ expected obedience in the carrying out of 
his commands. Mk. 11:4, 7. Codperation with 
the Lord is indispensable to His program. 

2. The pageant or procession. Mat. 21:8-11. This pro- 
cession attracted the multitude rather than the 
leaders. The people who represent the heart of the 
nation were instinctively drawn to Christ rather than 
the religious leaders who represent the head. ‘They 
spread their garments and the branches of the trees, 
crying out “Hosanna to the Son of David.” 

(a) Thus they rendered honor to Him. v. 8. 

(b) They heralded Him. v. 9. 

(c) This was done in humility. v. 10,11. In answer 
to “Who is this?” the only reply came from the 
multitude and their answer was not as it should 
have been “Our Messiah,” but only “Jesus, the 


282 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.” The Phari- 
sees bade Jesus, “rebuke thy disciples’ (Luke 
19:39), but to them He answered, “If these 
should hold their peace, the stones would im- 
mediately cry out.” (Luke 19:40). This 
attitude of the Pharisees was in accord with 
that of the Sanhedrin to the common people it 
general and especially the Galileans. John 7: 
45-50 ff. So Christ’s exaltation came from the 
humble multitude. 


Monday 


§ 120. The Cursing of the Fig Tree. Mat. 21: 18-22; 
Mark 11: 12-14. 


After His triumphal entry He went back that night to 
Bethany near by, where He was with the twelve. The hours 
were few and precious and that might have been the reason 
for His not taking sufficient food before leaving Bethany 
early Monday morning. As He came along to Jerusalem 
He saw standing alone a fig tree. Being hungered He ap- 
proached it, hoping to find some figs left over from the year 
before or some that were edible, though not fully ripe, for 
it was not yet the season of figs, but He was disappointed, 
for “He found nothing but leaves.” As both Edersheim 
and Geikie suggest, all in nature was symbolic to the 
Master, and so this live but fruitless tree reminded Him of 
the empty fruitless Jewish religion with which He was deal- 
ing. So to the tree He said, “Let there be no fruit from 
thee henceforward for ever.’ This He might have said of 
the Jewish religion as it existed in His time as an anachron- 
ism. ‘The fig tree withered away and the disciples heard, as 
Mark says. Did they see the deeper meaning and under- 
stand why He cursed the fig tree? 


§ 121. Second Cleansing of the Temple. Mat. 21: 12- 
17; Mark 11:15-19; Luke 19: 45-48. 


As section 119 showed Christ riding into Jerusalem in 
triumph, so this section has to do with His powerful pres- 
ence in the temple. 


THE PASSION WEEK 283 


1. Christ the powerful one. Mat.21:12. Jesus expresses 
Himself against the evil practices that were being carried 
on in the temple, just as He will against the irregularities 
of the human heart. Here Christ gave evidence of His 
being a strong, energetic prince who carried out His own 
wishes and ideals. There could be no righteous rule with- 
out renovation. 

2. Matthew 21:12, 13. Christ emphasizing prayer. His 
utterance, “My house shall be called a house of prayer’ 
shows that He put the spiritual to the fore. Prayer must 
go before profit. In our day when churches are apt to 
secularize the spiritual for the secular and monetary values 
there is great need for us to emphasize the reverence that 
Jesus had for the temple. 

3. Jesus’ power to heal—the Panacea (Mat. 21:14). 
Christ came into the temple not to tear down simply but 
also to build up. He did oppose their wrong practices but 
gave new life and health to the too weak bodies of the 
people who thronged Him within the temple. He was not 
in the temple simply as a reverent mystic to talk of prayer 
but to bring about definite results by using prayer to heal. 
When Christ is given His place He becomes creative and 
curative. If we let Him purge us and purify us He will 
accomplish for us and through us. 

4. Matthew 21:15-16. Christ became a priest of priests. 
The chief priests and scribes were moved with indignation 
when they saw the place that He had among the people. 
They noted the wonderful things that He did and they 
listened to the children saying, “Hosanna to the Son of 
David,” and their jealousy was provoked. The children 
knew Him to be a real priest. The professionalism of the 
chief priests and scribes melted away before His genuine 
priesthood. They were but shadows and He was the sub- 
stance; they the husks and He the corn. As John Henry 
Jowett said, “When the sun is up the stars are down.” So 
we should get by or through men and form to Christ. When 
ritual conceals Christ it is hurtful, but anything that reveals 
Christ is helpful. After He had cleansed the temple as 
Matthew says, “He left them and went forth out of the 
city to Bethany and lodged there.” ‘That leaving of them 


284 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


is suggestive. He hardly expected that the temple would 
stay cleansed, but He had at least expressed to those about 
Him His attitude toward those evil practices. In leaving 
Jerusalem He left the Jews and that dispensation which 
despised and rejected Him, but He delights and deigns to 
abide in us through the Spirit today. Let us love, honor 
and adore Him. 


Tuesday 
$122. The Fig Tree Withered. Mat. 21: 20-22; Mark 
11: 20-25. 


Jesus with His disciples passing by the fig tree again 
‘observed its condition and the disciples asked, “How did 
the fig tree immediately wither away?’ Jesus took this 
opportunity to instruct them in the accomplishment of faith. 
At the word of faith not only may a fig tree be caused to 
whither but a mountain may be cast into the sea. Here 
Jesus uttered that marvelous word which has been the 
encouragement to many a supplicating soul, “All things: 
whatsoever ye pray and ask for believe that ye have received 
them and ye shall have them.” ‘Then Jesus added, “And 
when ye stand praying, forgive.” Did He not think of 
His enemies who were about to put Him to death and of 
the grace that would be required to utter, “Father, forgive 
them ?” 


§ 123. Christ’s Authority Challenged. Mat. 21: 23-27; 
Mark 11: 27-33; Luke 20: 1-8. 


Tuesday was a busy day for our Lord in the Passion 
Week. We find Him early in the temple teaching. He is 
surrounded by eager listeners and interrupted by the “chief 
priests and leaders of the people.” ‘They being unable to 
deny His works and words and hoping to gain some advan- 
tage over Him asked, “By what authority doest thou these 
things, and who gave thee this authority?” But Jesus was 
wise as well as good, and tactful as well as true, so He did 
not answer their question directly but instead asked them 
a question. It was, “the baptism of John, was it from 


THE PASSION WEEK 285 


heaven or from men?” Jesus was prepared to answer their 
question if they would give Him a satisfactory answer to 
His, so they went into conference to prepare their answer 
for Him. He had them between the horns of the dilemma. 
Said they, “if we shall say, From heaven, he will say unto 
us, ‘Why then, did ye not believe him?’ but if we say, of 
men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.” 
There were only two possible answers and they could give 
neither answer to Jesus’ question. Had they said ‘from 
heaven,” they would have admitted that John’s ministry was 
of God; but they had opposed John and they knew better 
than to say that John’s ministry was simply from man, be- 
cause the people believed in John as a prophet, so all they 
could do was to go back to Jesus with a lie on their lips 
and say, “We do not know.’ Then Jesus was not obliged 
to answer their question. His authority had come from the 
same source as John’s baptism. We observe here the wis- 
dom of Jesus, in asking a question and remark that those 
who have truth might at times take up the offensive. Robt. 
J. Drummond in “Faith’s Perplexities,” writes on the “Cred- 
ulity of Unbelief.””. Men who are so skeptical of conserva- 
tive Christianity are yet so gullible in accepting the dogmas 
of so-called science. A well directed question may put this 
class of men to flight or at least silence them. 


§ 124. The Three Parables of Warning. Mat. 21: 28— 
22:14; Mark 12:1-2; Luke 20: 9-19. 


These three parables of warning are intended to call the 
attention of Jesus’ enemies and listeners in general to the 
folly and futility of professionalism without accomplishment 
(Mat. 21:28-32) and to the importance of giving proper 
place to Christ the Son of God, (Mat. 21: 33-46) and to the 
certainty of judgment and justice. (Mat. 21:1-14.) First, 
Jesus spoke of the two sons, one of whom would not 
promise to work in the vineyard, whereas the other did 
promise, but the one who promised did not work, whereas 
the one who had not promised wrought in the vineyard. 
The question was whether of the twain did the will of 
the father. The answer was evident. Of course, the one 
who, though he did not promise, yet performed, pleased 


286 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


his father by doing his will. So the publicans and harlots 
who make no profession would precede the unbelieving 
enemies of Christ, though they were professional religion- 
ists, because these latter did not take up with righteousness 
as John presented it, whereas the publicans and harlots did. 

Thus works and belief are essential and go before prom- 
ises and professions. Then this parable which has to do 
with the householder and his vineyard was very instructive 
as to the treatment that Jesus was receiving. When the 
owner of the vineyard went into a far country and then 
sent back his servants for his fruits, those who were left in 
charge of the vineyard mistreated and even killed the serv- 
ants. He hoped of course that they would respect his son, 
whom they also killed. It is quite evident that the master 
of the vineyard would deal severely with these husbandmen 
who slew his son. ‘He will miserably destroy those miser- 
able men.” Mat. 21:41. Other husbandmen will supplant 
them. Jesus is the “son” of the parable and His Father is 
the householder, while the Pharisees and scribes are the 
husbandmen who rejected Jesus. Jesus quotes Psalm 118 
showing that He Himself was the stone which the Jewish 
builders rejected. They did not recognize the corner-stone, 
so the kingdom of God has been taken away from them, but 
one day they will reckon with and recognize this stone. 
Their structure will be incomplete until they give Jesus 
a prominent place in it. 

There is a legend to the effect that when Solomon’s 
temple was being built a stone of unusual shape was brought 
from the quarry to the building site. The workmen could 
find no place for it in the wall, so they discarded it. The 
srass and weeds grew over it so that the workmen, not seeing 
it, stumbled over it and were bruised. One day they were 
at a loss to fill a certain niche in the wall. They recalled 
the rejected, despised stone, brought it forth and found it 
fitted and completed their wall. So one day Christ will be 
recognized as precious, even by those who rejected Him 
when He came the first time. 

As Jesus spake this parable the chief priests and Pharisees 
knew that He referred to them and so they would have 
laid hold of Him except for the fact that the multitude 





THE PASSION WEEK 287 


recognized Him as a prophet. (Mat. 21:45-46.) Then 
Jesus spoke a parable of a king making a marriage feast 
for his son and of being unsuccessful in gathering in those 
whom he had invited to the feast. No amount of entreaty, 
however, would persuade them to come. ‘They even made 
light of it and proceeded to kill his servants that were sent 
to remind them of the feast. So the king sent forth his 
armies and destroyed the murderers and burned up their 
city, and bade his servants go into the pathways of the 
highways and bid as many as they should find to come to 
the marriage feast. And so the wedding was supplied with 
guests. But behold one of these guests had not a wedding 
garment on him. When he was accosted by the king he was 
speechless. His punishment was that he should be bound 
hand and foot and cast into outer darkness. ‘They surely 
understood the parable. God had invited the Jewish nation 
with their religious leaders to grace the marriage feast of 
His Son but they had done despite to His invitation and 
spurned His prophets, and even were about to kill His Son, 
the Lord Jesus Christ. Then the offer of salvation was 
made to the Gentiles, many of whom came in to enjoy the 
marriage feast of the Son; but they must be prepared for 
the feast. To be unprepared means to incur the indignation 
of the king. Darkness without in the city street is but 
typical of that separation that will be for those who have 
not on the wedding garment which prepares them for fellow- 
ship with the Son of God. So the heathen share the king- 
dom of the Messiah with God, but the heathen will be 
judged. 


§ 125. Three Questions By the Jewish Rulers. Mat. 
22: 15-40; Mark 12: 13-34; Luke 20: 20-40. 


The first of these three questions and its object and answer 
cover Mat. 22:15-22. 1. The object of the approach of 
the Pharisee. This was evidently to ensnare Him in His 
talk. v. 15. As usual the Pharisees are attempting to en- 
trap Jesus. 2. The generalship employed by the Pharisees. 
v. 16. We observe how they themselves did not go direct 
to Jesus but sent their “disciples and the Herodians”; the 
latter were of a political party in favor of uniting Palestine 


288 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


to Herod’s dominion. They approach Jesus with a bit of 
flattery in order to draw Him out to make a frank state- 
ment which would endanger His life. 3. The issue. v. 17. 
This was as to whether or not it was lawful to give tribute 
to Cesar. To pay tax to Cesar would be the same as own- 
ing his authority rather than that of Jehovah. At least it 
would have seemed so to certain of the Jews. Had Christ 
answered “No,” it would have been the same as favoring a 
rebellion against Caesar, and had He answered “Yes,” He 
would have shocked the deep religious feelings of certain 
fanatical, even though deeply religious, Jews. The answer 
“Yes,” also would have seemed to be against Christ’s 
own claims so He answered most tactfully as well 
as truly when He said, “Render therefore unto Cesar the 
things which are Cesar’s, and unto God the things that 
are God’s.” ‘This answer was a.rebuke to their hypocrisy 
and also enlightenment as to how the relation of the state 
and religion might be thought of. Christ taught that 
loyalty to the state is compatible with fidelity to God, that 
patriotism and religion are not mutually exclusive but should 
go along together. 

The second question came from the Sadducees. See Mat. 
22: 23-33; It dealt with a certain woman having married 
seven brothers and the Sadducees raise the question as to 
whose wife she would be in the resurrection. Jesus’ reply 
to this question was that the Sadducees err in neither know- 
ing the Scriptures nor God’s power. ‘Their interpretation 
of the Scriptures was colored by their materialism. They 
conceived that the resurrection was simply an awakening 
as if from sleep, rather than a transforming by the power 
of God. Then Jesus instructed them as to the resurrection 
of the dead by observing that God at the bush said to 
Moses, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, 
and the God of Jacob.” The Lord remarked that God was 
not the God of the dead but of the living. Jesus showed 
that our relationship to God is a living one and that relation- 
ship is not a fact of the past only. Luke observed how that 
certain of the scribes said, ‘“[Thou hast well said, Master.” 
The same writer states that they durst not ask Him any 
question, but Matthew and Mark relate how the Pharisees 


THE PASSION WEEK 289 


gather about Him again and how a certain lawyer tempts 
Him) with a question which Jesus answers in a manner 
satisfactory to the scribe. So clearly did this scribe see 
the teaching of Jesus and therefore so fully, that he con- 
firmed the Master’s instruction, and the Lord remarked 
to him, “Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.” 
After this there was no more asking of questions. 


§ 126. Christ’s Unanswerable Question. Mat. 22: 41- 
46; Mark 12: 35-37; Luke 20: 41-44. 


Attorneys on opposite sides of a case “‘cross-question” 
not only witnesses but even one another as did Darrow 
Bryan at the famous Scopes trial at Dayton, Tennessee. 
Opponents in debate ask each other “unanswerable” ques- 
tions. ‘The fact that the Pharisees and Christ questioned 
one another indicates a deep-seated antagonism. When they 
asked Him, “By what authority doest Thou these things?” 
(Mat. 21:23) He answered by asking “The baptism of 
John, whence was it?” In Mat. 21:28 Jesus’ “But what 
think ye?” is another question-trap for the Pharisees. 
Their question “Is it lawful to give tribute to Ceesar or not?” 
(Mat. 22:17) shows that they still hope to “ensnare Him 
in His talk.” So Jesus, the Master Interrogator, finally 
submits to the Pharisees a quieting question or series of 
questions. Asked He “Whose son is’’ Christ ? Or, what is the 
descent of the Messiah? Edersheim says that this was the 
most familiar subject of their theology. Upon their reply 
“The son of David” Jesus asks “How then doth David in 
the Spirit call him Lord?” etc. Then Jesus quotes Psalm 
110: 1, “The Lord said unto my Lord,” etc. and drives the 
Pharisees to the wall by again asking a question, “If David 
then called him Lord, how is he his son?” He is David’s 
son only on the human side. On His divine side He is 
Jehovah’s Son. But the Pharisees would not recognize 
Jesus as the Christ. 

Rabbinic writings applied Psalm 110 Messianically. So 
both they and Jesus agree as to the Predictive character of 
the Psalm as well as to its interpretation. Then we note 
also that Christ attributes the Psalm to David. 

19 


290 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


The result of this dialogue is two-fold. “The common 
people heard Him gladly,” and “neither durst any man 
from that day forth ask him any more questions.” Jesus 
so showed up the incompetence of the Pharisees both to 
themselves and the people that the mouths of the former 
were closed and the ears of the latter opened in His presence. 


§ 127. Woes Against the Scribes and Pharisees, Mat. 
23; Mark 12: 38-40; Luke 20: 45-47, 


The scribes and Pharisees had been shadowing Jesus, 
He had faced them single-handed when they ventured from 
their ambush and had worsted them, 


They had plied Him with questions which He easily 
answered or deftly brushed aside, leaving them embarrassed, 
beaten and humiliated once and again. He had floored 
them with pointed “unanswerable” questions. As oppon- 
ents these “religious experts,” “blind leaders of the blind” 
were easily outclassed by the Master. So far as He person- 
ally was concerned He could have walked away, with the 
tread of a conqueror, from His defeated adversaries. They 
would not be reconciled to Him. Why should He trouble 
with them? 


Ah! He, with characteristic solicitude, cares for “the 
multitudes” and “His disciples.” “The Great Shepherd of 
the Sheep” thinks of the flock. He is no hireling. So He 
warns of the wolves, which are ready to pounce upon the 
sheep as soon as the shepherd has gone. “A bruised reed 
will He not break, and smoking flax will He not quench,”’ 
Fle feeds the hungry, heals the sick, raises the dead, con- 
demns not a weak, wayward woman in the presence of her 
shameless accusers. But He spares not these “hypocrites.” 
Their serpentine nature He openly describes and deplores. 
Why spare the wolves and by so doing jeopardize the 
lambs? 


Yet these ‘“‘sit on Moses’ seat” and “therefore whatsoever 
they bid you, do and observe.” Jesus is no anarchist. With 
Him “the powers that be are ordained of God.” “But do 
not ye after their works; for they say, and do not.” Their 
precepts are better than their practices. They impose heavy 


THE PASSION WEEK 291 


burdens ‘on men by their exacting requirements (v. 4). 
Yet they will not raise a finger to make it easier for those 
who are weighed down with Rabbinic rulings. Whether, 
“will not move them with their finger,’ means will not by 
writing, in which the finger is used, make the requirement 
less so that it could be met more easily, or put forth a 
fingers “worth” of effort to carry out their own religious 
laws, whichever of these meanings, if either, is intended, 
the criticism is that these Pharisees are very severe with 
others and very generous with themselves.” Whereas, 
as Dr. Pirazzini said of Dr. A. B. Simpson and Mr. Nardi, 
that they, being real saints, differed from ordinary saints in 
that they were so “generous with others and so severe with 
themselves.” 

These scribes and Pharisees limit their efforts to these 
“works” that are “seen of men.” (v. 5.) So instead of 
putting more of the law of God into their minds and getting 
its real spirit into their hearts they ‘make broad their 
phylacteries;” i. e., enlarge ‘‘the cases or boxes made of calf- 
skin, and fastened by leather straps to the left arm and on 
the forehead, in accordance with a literal interpretation of 
Ex. 13:16 and Deut. 6:8.” These boxes contained “slips 
of parchment inscribed with four portions of the Law (Ex. 
13: 3-10, 11-16; Deut. 6:5-9; 11:13-21).” (Cambridge 
Bible. ) 

The size of the parchment, the inside, was not altered but 
the box, the outside, was enlarged so as to make their piety 
more easily observed. The Hebrew word for these is 
tephillin and signified “prayer.” But our word phylacteries 
is a transliteration of the Greek phylacterin, “defences” and 
in late Greek “amulets” or “charms.” This study of the 
word is a revelation of their superstitious superficiality. 
The bigger the boxes which contained the few verses of the 
law on parchment, the more devout did these “blind leaders 
of the blind” imagine themselves to be. 

Wearing of phylacteries was common among the Jews 
and probably Jesus wore them, but what He condemned was 
“the ostentatious enlargement of them.” 

Then their over-emphasis of the outward is manifest by 
the fact that they “enlarge the borders of their garments.” 


292 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


The fringe of the cloak was blue, the color of the sky, and 
so typical of heavenly purity. These scribes and Pharisees 
must have reasoned that the larger the badge, the more 
likely 1s the wearer to incarnate the principles symbolized 
by that badge. So eager were these scribes and Pharisees 
to occupy “‘the chief places at feasts and the chief seats in 
the synagogues” (v. 6) that Rabbinic writings elaborate 
on restricting and regulating the places according to rank. 
In the College the most learned were to be preferred and at 
feasts the most aged. 

Very jealous were they for “salutations in the market- 
places.” To neglect to saluate a Rabbi involved punishment. 
It is related that two great Rabbis complained that they 
must have lost their appearance of learning since in the 
marketplace they were addressed with ““May your peace be 
great” without “My masters” being added. Talmage writes 
“They make themselves drum majors in the parade.” ‘The 
Talmud correctly says “Love the work but hate the title,” 
which we might interpret as suggesting that what one is 
and does is more important than what he is called. A 
great man dignifies a menial task; but a mean man degrades 
even a throne. ‘The rank is but the guinea’s stamp.” 

So to His disciples Jesus says “But ye be not called Rabbi 
[my great one, my honorable sir], for one is your teacher, 
and all ye are brethren.” Christ would warn His disciples 
against the contagion of this unbecoming: self-assertion. 
And besides this they had a “Rabbi,” a ‘““Teacher.” He, who 
was teaching them, was their Teacher. They were simply 
“brethren.” Then He warned them against letting any 
earthly “father” take the place of the “Father that is in 
heaven.” Herein is suggested the peculiar fault of the 
Rabbis alluded to here. “The heathen Governor of Czsarea 
is represented as rising up before Rabbis because he beheld 
‘the faces as it were of angels’; ....From another Rabbi 
rays of light are said to have visibly proceeded.” This 
self-exaltation, even to heaven, was obnoxious to Him that 
“thought the being on an equality with God was not to be 
retained with eager grasp.” (Phil. 2:6.) So using the 
pretentious scribes and Pharisees as examples of what He 
desired His disciples not to be, Jesus said ‘Neither be ye 


THE PASSION WEEK 293 


called masters [leaders] for one is your Master, the Christ.” 
He was their acknowledged “leader.” He was the Christ, 
the Messiah, for whom these “Rabbis” were supposed to 
prepare the minds and hearts of the people. But an ex- 
aggerated sense of their own importance had displaced their 
Messianic expectation. ‘They recognized not the Messiah. 

He was about to serve all on the cross (v. 11). His humil- 
iation was about to be completed on the cross, in pain and 
shame. (v. 12) “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted 
him,” (Phil. 2:9). He would be the Example of His dis- 
ciples. 


Woes 


“Corresponding to the eight Beatitudes in the Sermon 
on the Mount with which His public ministry began, He now 
closed it with eight denunciations of woe.” (Edersheim) 
With respect to the Pharisees “Love had played her part in 
vain.” “Justice leaped upon the stage.” 

He who “spoke as never man spake,” “with authority 
and not as the scribes” pronounced these “woes” within 
the hearing of thousands probably. Farrar says “Some of 
the Temple courts had room for at least 6,000 people, and it 
is probable that even more were assembled in them at the 
Passover.” We admire the courage of Christ as He stands 
there and scathes with withering “woes” the men into 
whose hands He knew He would soon fall. Ina few brief 
days He would feel their poisonous fangs and be smitten 
with the “bitter venom of their hatred.” For Christ knew 
that Satan was about to seem to win an engagement at 
Calvary through these his emissaries who would insist on 
His crucifixion. But our Lord had gone in to win the final 
victory and redeem the race through death at the hands of 
the men whose hypocrisy He denounced. 

Christ’s “woes,” or expressions of grief and indignation, 
are instructive as to character and practices of the scribes 
and Pharisees. Verse 13 condemns the misuse of the “key 
of knowledge” given to the scribe as he was admitted to the 
order. They simply locked people out of the kingdom of 
heaven by closing their own ears to the truth. ‘Though 
“Judaism has been classed among the non-missionary re- 


294 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


ligions” yet Jesus had good grounds for His reference to 
“proselyting’ in verse 15. ‘John Hyrcanus imposed Juda- 
ism on Edom at the point of the sword. ‘The conversion 
is recorded of whole tribes in Arabia, and on the shores 
of the Caspian...... Probably the proselytism in the text 
is connected with the charge of rapacity; the Pharisees 
seeking to convert wealthy Gentiles, over whom they ob- 
tained influence.” (Cambridge Bible) 

And new converts tend to exaggerate the externals of the 
religion with which they take up and so those of the 
Pharisees would be “twofold” worse than their religious 
forbears. 

Verses 16-22 teach how these men, who should have been 
monuments of integrity, indulged in childish quibbling so 
as to avoid keeping their oaths. 

Though the Pharisees and scribes tithed with scrupulosity, 
yet they disregarded judgment, mercy and faith. Thus they 
evinced their spiritual near-sightedness and inability to 
recognize values. ‘They thus strained the gnat out of the 
wine but “swallowed camels into the heart.” 

The “woe” against cleansing the outside of the cup and 
platter (vs. 25, 26) is aimed at a superficial, hypocritical 
externalism which would appear clean on the outside but 
disregarded crooked dealing and corrupt living. Why be 
so careful to have a cup clean without; why have the 
behavior so correct? Ifa clean cup is filled by ill-gotten gain 
and its contents lead to debauchery, why take pains to have 
it immaculate on the outside. 

Then as though Jesus would exhaust similes to express 
his utter abhorrence of the inner corruption of the Phari- 
sees who posed as proper persons and examples of piety 
He likens them to “white sepulchres,” (vs. 27, 28). The 
allusion is to the Jewish custom of whitewashing the graves, 
or marking them with chalk on a fixed day every year— 
the fifteenth of Adar—lest they would ceremonially defile 
themselves by unconsciously walking over them. The white- 
wash on the outside was the pious pretensions of the Phari- 
sees; the “dead men’s bones,” in striking contrast, their 
utter moral decay and corruption. 

These “hypocrites” deplore the slaughter of the prophets 


THE PASSION WEEK 295 


at the hands of their fathers and seek to atone for ancestral 
sins by paying attention to the tombs of the righteous but 
Jesus labels them as true sons of their notorious sires. Said 
He “ye brood of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment 
of hell?” Since Abel’s day and death God’s saints and 
servants have been laid low by the bloody bludgeon of Cain 
and his descendants, among whom the Pharisees could be 
found. 

Having emptied the contents of His holy wrath into these 
scathing ‘Woes’ and having poured it down the unwilling 
throats of the scribes and Pharisees with merciless vigor, the 
Master apostrophizes Jerusalem. In holy anger He remem- 
bers tender mercy. His bowels of compassion yearn for 
Jerusalem, the city of the great king. Though she had 
“killed the prophets” yet He felt the same loving, tender 
care for her as a mother hen does for her brood. But Jeru- 
salem had spurned His solicitude. They “would not” so He 
“could not’! So He was going and leaving Jerusalem 
desolate. But again, in God’s mercy, He will come; then 
Jerusalem will join the children who sang, “Blessed is He’’! 


§ 128, el Two Mites. Mark 12: 41-44; Luke 
21: 1-4. 


The Master, probably physically exhausted by His de- 
nunciations of the Scribes and Pharisees, sat down in the 
court of women over against the treasury. We fancy that 
He enjoyed the rest of soul and body that came to Him as 
He watched the multitude cast their money into the treas- 
ury. There were thirteen chests, each shaped like a trumpet. 
Into these were put contributions for benevolences and 
temple furnishings. Jesus observed that the “rich cast in 
much.” Authorities state that so strong was the tendency 
for the rich to give largely for the temple that a law was 
enacted to keep down the gifts to a certain proportion of 
‘one’s possessions. Among the givers was a poor widow. 
Her poverty must have been manifest by her garb or by the 
humble attitude with which she approached the chests. 
Jesus observed her dropping in two mites; equivalent to 
about one-seventh of a cent; then He called unto Him His 
disciples and said, “Verily I say unto you, this poor widow 


296 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


cast in more than all they which are casting into the treas- 
ury: for they all cast in of their superfluity, but she of her 
want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.” Jesus 
used this occasion to teach that “the essence of charity is 
self-denial.” She gave all that she had, all her living. She 
possessed only two mites and, according to the law, she 
could not give less; so it is folly to speak of her giving two 
instead of one. Ambrose says one coin out of a little is 
better than a treasury out of much, for it is not considered 
how much is given but how much remains. Then we are 
reminded of Paul’s word, “If there be first a willing mind 
it is accepted according to what a man hath.” So the Master 
measures the sacrifice not by what is given but by what is 
left over after the gift has been made. Some one has 
written that no one should use “mite” to name his gifts 
without giving all, else he will “pass the bitterest sarcasm 
on himself.” This beautiful little incident enabled Jesus to 
leave the temple with words of approval and not anger. 


§ 129. Gentiles Seeking Jesus. John 12: 20-36. 


To these great feasts of the Jews, foreign proselytes came. 
Among these, at this Passover time, were certain Greeks. 
The presence of these proselytes attested their sincerity for 
they would have come in the face of the ridicule of their 
countrymen. The likelihood is that these were “proselytes 
of the gate” who had been won over to faith in Jehovah and 
the Old Testament. These could attend the synagogue but 
not pass beyond the court of the heathen in the temple. 


Desiring to see Jesus, they appealed to Philip, whose name 
is Greek. He, out of deference to Andrew’s intimacy with 
the Lord, told Andrew and they two tell Jesus. Though the 
narratives do not so state, yet the probability is that Jesus 
came out to these Greeks. Some see this incident as the 
prelude of the transition of the Kingdom of God from the 
Jew to the Gentile. They remind us that Wise Men from 
the East came to see the baby Jesus, and that these Wise 
Men from the West sought the God-man. Verses 23 and 24 
indicate that Jesus was reminded of His approaching death, 
so He referred to His glorification and spoke of His death 


THE PASSION WEEK 297 


in the familiar words, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto you, ex- 
cept a grain of wheat fall into the earth and die, it abideth 
by itself, but if it die, it beareth much fruit.” Jesus felt 
Himself circumscribed as a grain of wheat is limited, for 
its life is bound up in the seed until it fall into the ground 
and sprout into new life as it disintegrates in death; then 
the germ is free to grow into a stock which produces many 
grains of wheat. ‘Then the Master, in verse 25, asserts the 
great principle, “He that loveth his life loses it,” etc. Then 
He challenges His hearers to sacrificial service. 


As the shadows of the cross are seen in the distance, He 
says, ‘Now is my soul troubled and what shall I say?’ 
Bengel remarks that He did not say, ‘““‘What shall I choose?” 
Some manuscripts give, ‘Father, save me from this hour,” 
as a question. This seems to satisfy the context. Jesus 
asks, ‘Shall I say, Father save me from this hour?” ‘Then 
He says, “But for this cause came I unto this hour,” and 
adds, “Father, glorify Thy name.” Then as He paused, 
heaven spoke, “I have both glorified it and will glorify it 
again.’ Some of the multitude interpreted the sound as 
thunder, and others, believing in Christ, thought it was an 
angel’s voice. It was simply the Father approving the Son 
and giving evidence to those who heard Jesus speak. In 
verse 31, Jesus predicts that His death will be the death- 
knell and death-blow of Satan, and then graphically refers 
to the attractive power of the cross. As verse 34 states, the 
multitude knew that He referred to Himself as the Christ, 
and they did not understand how He could die since from 
the law they understood that the Messiah would abide for- 
ever. Then He uttered a parable to them about the light. 
We wonder if they understood. 


§ 130. The Jews’ Rejection of Christ. John 12: 37-50. 


Verses 37-43 of this section record the Jewish rejection 
of Jesus, which happened according to prophecy. Isaiah is 
quoted. It is sad to read, “Nevertheless, even of the rulers, 
many believed on him, but because of the Pharisees they 
did not confess him lest they should be put out of the 
synagogue.” ‘These loved the praise of man more than the 


298 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


glory of God. The quotations from Isaiah are not without 
difficulty. In Matthew 13 and Mark 4, we have these or 
similar words quoted to explain why Jesus spake in parables. 
It would seem as though by Jesus’ teaching parables He 
intended to conceal the truth from them, and that the multi- 
tude was doomed to destruction simply because Isaiah so 
prophesied. 


We quote the following paragraph from the Cambridge 
Bible, which is very clear on this point: 

“At the beginning of His ministry our Lord did not teach 
by Parable. “I'he Sermon on the Mount may be taken as 
the type of the ‘words of grace’ which He spake “not as the 
scribes.’ Beatitudes, laws, promises were uttered distinctly, 
not indeed without similitudes, but with similitudes that 
explained themselves.’ And so He continued for some time. 
But His direct teaching was met with scorn, unbelief, and 
hardness. From this time forward ‘parables’ entered largely 
into His recorded teaching, and were at once attractive and 
penal. 

(a) Attractive, as ‘instruments of education for those 
who were children in age or character,’ and offering in a 
striking form much for the memory to retain, and for the 
docile and truth-loving to learn. 


(b) Penal, as testing the disposition of those who listened 
to them; withdrawing the light from such as loved dark- 
ness and were wilfully blind, and protecting the truth from 
the mockery of the scoffer; finding out the fit hearers, and 
leading them, but them, only, on to deeper knowledge.” 

Then in the closing verses of this section, Jesus asserts 
His authority and makes His hearers responsible directly to 
the Father. 


§ 131. Discourse Concerning the Destruction of Jeru- 
salem and the End of the World. Mat., 
Chapters 24, 25, 26, 1, 2; Mark, Chapter 13; 
Luke 21: 5-38. | 


The Master with heavy heart (Mat. 23:37) was going 
out of the temple. To the Jews He had said, “Your house 
is left unto you desolate.” He was leaving. The s‘house’ 


THE PASSION WEEK 299 


was theirs. He had cleansed the temple twice because He 
regarded it as His “Father’s house.” But the very fact that 
two cleansings were necessary argues that God’s chosen 
people were poor “housekeepers.” ‘They had prostituted the 
temple which Herod, the Idumean, had built to curry their 
favor and flatter their religious pride. 

What a building it was! So magnificent! How solid! 
Josephus says that it was built of white stones of great size, 
thirty-seven and a half and even forty-five feet long, twelve 
feet thick, and eighteen feet broad. The temple represented 
a “splendor so great that it was often said that he who had 
not seen it had missed one of the wonders of the world.” 

Possibly fearing that Jesus would miss some of the 
grandeur of the temple, “His disciples came to him to shew 
him the buildings of the temple,’ thus manifesting a re- 
ligious patriotism characteristic of their race. How they 
must have been shocked when Jesus prophesied the destruc- 
tion of this pile of massive masonry; this work of art, 
patriotism and religion! 

(See “The Training of the Twelve,’ A. B. Bruce, page 
fag hey 

Little wonder that after they had descended into the 
beautiful, luxuriant Kedron Valley, and then had gone up 
to the Mount,of Olives, where a commanding view of the 
temple was possible, Peter and James and John and Andrew 
asked Him privately, “When shall these things be? And 
what shall be the sign of thy coming and the consummation 
of the age?” 

The small group of disciples had cast their lot with Jesus 
of Nazareth. He was their Christ, “the Son of the living 
God,” as Peter had confessed. Whatever the Messianic ex- 
pectations of others were, He was their Messiah. So they 
were ready even to see the temple destroyed, though they 
shared Israel’s pride in it, if only their Christ might come 
into His kingdom. Jesus saw the temple and its services 
as a hollow shell. ‘The kernel or life of the religion of 
Jehovah had become corrupted and dried up. An enemy’s 
foot would break the brittle shell. The disciples saw the 
temple as the last obstacle to Christ’s unhindered reign. 
They connected its destruction with His “presence” and a 


300 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


new age. So they eagerly and “privately” ask Him, “When 
shall these things be? And what shall be the sign?” etc. 

The eagerness of the disciples to know just when the 
Jewish religion, whose center and sanctuary was the temple, 
would go down, and when Christ’s kingdom would be erected 
upon its ruins, led the Master to warn them against being 
led astray. Mat. 24:4. False Christs would lead them 
astray. Wars would trouble them as being harbingers of 
the “end.” But the Master would have His disciples fear- 
less in the face of calamity and personal danger; He would 
have them true amidst the tribulation and hatred that are to 
try them. He urges endurance to the end (Mat. 24: 13) 
in spite of stumblings, treacheries, hatreds, and wanderings. 
He predicts the chilling effect of iniquity upon Christian 
love and promises that the end will come after the “gospel 
of the kingdom” shall have been preached in the whole world 
for a testimony unto all nations. 

Strangely enough neither Mark nor Luke refers to the 
preaching of the Gospel “unto all the nations.” Mark 
stresses the need of endurance in face of trials (13: 12, 13). 
Luke, with his characteristic human touch, assures that “not 
a hair of your head shall perish” and encourages a patient 
endurance (21:18, 19). 

A study of this first section of the parallel accounts, there- 
fore, leads us to conclude that Jesus taught that faithfulness 
and patience are valuable in the presence of any teaching 
on His “coming” and “the end of the world.” Clearly what 
He alludes to in Mat. 24: 5-12 are not to be regarded so 
much as “signs” of His near “coming,” but rather as hap- 
penings that make the Christians panicky, restless, and may- 
be too eager for His return. Therefore, He would foster in 
them a fidelity to duty and a confidence of our heavenly 
Father’s care “until”? He returns. The vitality of Chris- 
tianity and the strength of our faith are made evident by 
our “carrying on” in the bodily absence of our Captain. 
Let us maintain our morale “until’’ He appears. 

Then after Jesus had encouraged to steadfastness, faith 
and patience, He answers their question, “When shall these 
things be?” Yet He gives no date, but rather tells the cir- 
cumstances of the fall of Jerusalem (Mat. 24: 15-28), If 


THE PASSION WEEK 301 


Mat. 24:15, Mark 13:14, and Luke 21: 20 are parallel pas- 
sages then “the abomination of desolation” is the besieging 
army, or “in the general sense in which the Jews took it, 
that the heathen power (Rome, the abominable) would 
bring desolation—lay the city and temple waste.” 

If the “abomination of desolation” referred to could have 
been that of Daniel 11:31, then Antiochus Epiphanes would 
have been intended. 2 Maccabees 6 relates his abominations. 
But that was history in Jesus’ day. Though this may be 
repeated by Anti-Christ (Dan. 9:27), of whom Antiochus 
Epiphanes is a fitting type, yet the simple and easily held 
view is the one first stated; namely, Rome’s armies. Says 
Newman: “Titus, son of Vespasian, with an army of 80,- 
000, besieged Jerusalem in A. D. 70.”’ Josephus relates that 
the besieged held out obstinately. Famine, pestilence, and 
cannibalism were added to the destructive army, etc. See 
Newman, Vol. I, page 117. 

Referring to this period Orelli writes: “A greater catas- 
trophe than the mortal combat of the Jewish people with the 
Roman world power, and the destruction of the holy city, is 
unknown to the history of the world.” In keeping with 
Mat. 24:16, Eusebius relates that the Christians of Judea 
(warned by the prediction) fled to Pella in 68 A. D. Lives 
were so hazarded that flight from roof to roof was prefer- 
able rather than to risk a descent into the house. Field la- 
borers did well to sacrifice their outer garments and to escape 
in the tunic only. A mother, with a child to nurse and carry, 
was, of course, seriously handicapped in a race for life. 
So the fewer deterrents the better when the Roman legions 
are in pursuit. 

Commenting on “great tribulation” (Mat. 24:21), the 
Cambridge Bible says, ‘No words can describe the un- 
equalled horrors of this siege. It was the Passover season, 
and Jews from all parts were crowded within the walls. . . 
The temple-courts swam with the blood of civil discord, 
which was literally mingled with the blood of the sacrifices. 
Jewish prisoners were crucified by hundreds in view of 
their friends. . . The inhabitants were reduced by famine 
to the most loathsome of food and to deeds of unspeakable 
cruelty. Jerusalem was taken August 10, A. D. 70. 1,100,- 


302 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


O00 Jews perished in the siege; 100,000 were sold into 
slavery. With the fall of Jerusalem, Israel ceased to exist 
as anation. It was truly the end of an aeon.”’ Scanty food 
supply, the crowded city, etc., “shortened” the siege since 
the defences were very strong. Josephus reports Titus as 
saying, “It was God alone who ejected the Jews from these 
fortifications.” 


The Jews, and even the Jewish Christians, “the elect,” 
would be tempted in their desolation to take up with false 
Christs. Hence the warnings of Mat. 24:23-26. ‘The true 
“Second” coming of the “Son of man,” the real Christ, will 
be as evident to His disciples as a bright lightning flash 
across the darkened sky. So why go after false Christs? 
As eagles detect the presence of a carcass, so with unfailing 
spiritual perception will the “elect”? perceive their Redeemer 
when He comes. 


Luke, always supplying us with the human element, pic- 
tures the Jews “led captive into all the nations: and Jeru- 
salem trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the 
Geniles be fulfilled. Thus he gives us our bearings. Cf. 
Mat. 24:27 with Luke 21:24. With a few strokes of the 
pen we are carried over centuries—1855 years to date—(70 
plus 1855 equals 1925). 


Thus, we judge, Jesus in Mat. 24: 4-26 and in the parallel 
accounts answers the first question asked in verse three, 
“When shall these things [the destruction of Jerusalem] 
be?” But the disciples had linked the destruction of the 
temple with Christ’s coming and “the end of the world.” 
Mat. 24:3. On this Bruce says, “Local and partial judg- 
ments are wont to be thus mixed up with the universal one 
in men’s imaginations; and hence almost every great 
calamity which inspires awe leads to anticipation of the 
last day.”” Then Bruce quotes Luther’s words, “The world 
cannot stand long,” etc., spoken when his mind was clouded 
by tribulation. He recalls also the fact that “towards the 
close of the tenth century people allowed churches to fall 
into disrepair because the end of the world was deemed close 
at hand.” But Jesus urged that “This Gospel of the king- 
dom shall be preached in the whole world . . . and then 


THE PASSION WEEK 303 


shall the end come.” No tribulations must deter our evan- 
gelizing. 

As we observed above, Luke 21:24 supplies what Mat- 
thew lacks and “interprets the tribulation (Mat. 24: 29) so 
as to include the subsequent long-lasting dispersion of Israel 
among the nations.” So since Jerusalem’s destruction we 
have had “the times of the Gentiles,” 

For nineteen centuries these “times” have continued. 
Christ has not come back yet, though many “False Christs” 
(Mat. 24:24) have appeared. When the Real Christ re- 
turns, His followers will become aware of it (Mat. 24: 27, 
28). But not until after “the tribulation” (Mat. 24:29) 
will He return. Evidently “the sign of His coming”’ re- 
quested by His disciples is the series of events and phe- 
nomena suggested in Mat. 24:29. Evdersheim interprets the 
language here as referring to no “visible physical signs in 
the literal heavens,” but rather the crumbling of Gentile 
world powers—the dimming of earth’s leading lights. These 
nations referred to will cease to have a place in the sun. 
The Cambridge Bible takes the same view. After these 
startling changes and shakings “shall all the tribes of the 
earth mourn,” probably during the “Great Tribulation” and 
then “they shall see the Son of man coming on the 
rela it < CER mis ara 

As we read the text we are convinced that the Master did 
not give His disciples the information which they desired. 
Mat. 24:3 specifically tells us just what they wanted to 
know. “When” and “what sign?” They were wrong in 
supposing that the temple’s destruction and Christ’s “com- 
ing”’ (i. e., presence) and the “consummation of the age”’ 
would necessarily synchronize. Did Jesus mean to distin- 
guish between the, to us, two events and times? Did He 
have or avail Himself of full prophetic power on this occa- 
sion? Matthew 24:36 and Mark 13:32 compel a negative 
answer. Then they evidently thought the Jewish age would 
end all except Christ’s personal rule. Thus they were 
ignorant of our (Gentile’s) “day of grace,” which has con- 
tinued nineteen centuries since. 

As the fig tree’s leaves are a “sign” of approaching sum- 
mer, so “all these things” will signify that “it is nigh.” 


304 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Luke explains Mat. 24:33 in Luke 21:31 and says that it 
is “the kingdom of God” which “is nigh.” So “nigh” was 
the Master’s prophecy to fulfillment, it would seem, that He 
said “This generation shall not pass away till all things be 
accomplished.” Jerusalem was destroyed within that gen- 
eration. But to apply this prediction to the coming of Christ 
we must think of that generation containing in embryo the 
succeeding generation of the church age. That was a gen- 
eration of beginnings. 

Surely the urge of the whole discourse was “Watch there- 
fore for ye know not on what day your Lord cometh.” 
Mat. 24:42. The time is uncertain, but the event will occur, 
the time will come. Therefore, watch! Noah watched; one 
of the “two men. . . in the field” will be watching. 

Some will be “left.” Just as “the door was shut” and the 
five virgins who were not prepared to wait for the Bride- 
groom were excluded from the marriage, so many will be 
“left”? when Christ comes because they are not prepared to 
“watch.” 

Then in the parable of the talents (Mat. 25: 14-30) the 
Master warned against sitting idly by, faithless and critical 
while “a man went into another country,’ having “de- 
livered unto them his goods.” Only the two servants who 
had used their talents profitably were rewarded. The other 
one, who did not even care enough for his master’s goods 
to put what he had been entrusted with out on interest, was 
cast out as unprofitable. So if the parable of the ten virgins 
urges to piety and Holy Spirit fullness, that of the talents 
indicates the necessity of good works until He returns. 
Failure in either of these requirements means exclusion 
from Christ. See Mat. 25: 10-13 and 25: 30. 

In his ‘The Life of Christ,’ Canon Farrar, referring to 
“when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of 
Thy coming, and of the end of the world,” says, ‘This 
question of the Apostles drew from Him the great Escha- 
tological Discourse . . . of which the four moral key- 
notes are ‘Beware!’ and ‘Watch!’ and ‘Endure!’ and ‘Pray.’ ” 
Farrar believes that difficulties may be disposed of by let- 
ting the Synoptic Gospels throw light upon one another; 
by agreeing that Jesus’ actual words were condensed; by 


THE PASSION WEEK 305 


bearing in mind that probably we have a Greek rendering 
of Aramaic vernacular; by resting assured that the object 
of Prophecy is moral warning, primarily, rather than chron- 
ological indication; by accepting with quiet reverence that 
in His human capacity Jesus did not know the day and the 
hour (Mark 13:32). 

Then in Mat. 25:31-46, Jesus discloses how that He 
who was in their midst as the humble “Son of man,” will 
come “in His glory and all the angels with Him.” No 
longer will He be among them as one that serveth. But 
“then shall He sit on the throne of His glory.” As He 
spake He was fulfilling Phil. 2:7, 8; but then He will ful- 
fill Phil. 2:9-11. No nation will be exempt from His judg- 
ment (Mat. 25:32a). His power will be as an oriental 
shepherd’s when he divides sheep from goats. The “sheep” 
will be those who minister to Christ through His “breth- 
ren”; the “goats on the left” will be those who neglected 
Christ by ignoring His “least.” 

How these words must have assured His disciples that 
He loved and cared for them and that one day, the Day of 
His power, they would be vindicated and their enemies pun- 
ished. 

But by no means least important in this passage is the 
reference to “eternal punishment” (Mat. 25:46). The 
meaning of this is determined by the word “eternal,” aiontos. 
Liddell and Scott’s classical Greek lexicon gives lasting, 
eternal for aionios. Aion, from which it is derived, accord- 
ing to this reliable work, is first a space or period of time, 
one’s life long, a generation, an age, then long space of time, 
and then eternity. So also eis tous aionas ton aionon, lit- 
erally unto the ages of the ages is rendered forever and ever. 

Upon turning to Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the 
New Testament which is a translation, revision and enlarge- 
ment of Grimm’s Wilke’s Clavis Novi Testamenti (“key of 
the New Testament”) we find a striking agreement with the 
above meanings of aionios. The latter work devotes about 
five columns to these two words because of their bearing 
upon Christian teaching. He observes the two possible 
etymologies of aion: aien poetic for aei (always)—plus on 
(being); i. e., being always. Aristotle and Proclus give 

20 


306 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


this. ‘‘But more probable is the conjecture that aion is so 
connected with aenu, to breathe or blow, as to denote prop- 
erly that which causes life, vital force.’ However, Thayer 
concedes that aion is generally connected with aez (always), 
Skr. aivas, Lat. aevum, Goth. aus, Germ. ewig, Eng. aye, 
ever. ‘This last statement makes us restful about translating 
the adjective aionios derived from aion, everlasting. Says 
Thayer further, “Aion in Attic prose differs from chronos 
by denoting time unlimited and boundless which is not con- 
ceived of as divisible into aiones (ages) but rather into 
chronoi (times). Further he states, ‘“The adjective ach- 
ronos (lit. not time), independent of time, above and be- 
yond all time, is synonomous with aionios; where time 
(with its subdivisions and limitations) ends eternity begins.”’ 
Here we have a suggested solution to the problem of how a 
word, aion, which is translated age in some passages (Mat. 
13:22, Margin of R. V.; Gal. 1:4, Margin of R. V. and 
elsewhere) can be rendered “forever” in others (John 6: 
51, 58; Heb. 5:6, et al). “An unbroken age’’ is “perpe- 
tuity of time, eternity.’”’ Then how could God better convey 
to our minds, accustomed to thinking of beginnings and 
ends, the notion of endlessness of duration, than by piling 
up “ages” (aiones)? Soon we have reached the limit of 
our imagination. No human eye could see the top of a 
pile of all the mountains of earth. So no human mind can 
measure the “‘for ever,” eis tous aionas, unto the ages, of 
Heb. 13:8; likewsie “forevermore,” eis pantas tous aonas, 
unto all the ages of Jude 25 suggests eternity to man. Then 
who would dare to say that eis tous aionas ton aionon, unto 
the ages of the ages, in Gal. 1:5, means anything else than 
everlasting “for ever and ever.” 

It seems to the point to observe with Scofield that aionios 
is used to express the duration of the believers blessedness, 
and I add in the very same verse in which amonios expresses 
the duration of the suffering of the wicked (Mat. 25:46). 
If one is “everlasting,” why not the other? And who would 
claim less for the “blessedness” of believers? 

How those that advocated rendering aionios age-long or 
age-enduring must be thrown into a panic, or else do violence 
to their sense of consistency when they read “eternal God,” 


THE PASSION WEEK 307 


aiomon theon, in Romans 16: 26 and “eternal spirit,” pneu- 
matos aiomon in Hebrews 9:14! Certainly they cannot 
limit the Persons of the Trinity to an age! 


§ 132, Conspiracy Between the Chief Priests and 
Judas. Mat. 26: 1-5, 14-16; Mark 14: 1, 2, 10, 
11; Luke 22: 1-6. 


After the Master’s words on the Judgment, He proph- 
esied afresh that He would be crucified at the Feast of the 
Passover, two days hence. Evidently the disciples were not 
yet prepared for this unwelcomed news. 


Another group was bent on the consummation of His 
death. The Matthew account says that “the chief priests 
and the elders of the people were gathered together under 
the court of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas.”’ 

Edersheim makes the point that their gathering was con- 
sultative rather than judicial. He infers this from the fact 
that they were meeting in the high priest’s palace, rather 
than in their ordinary meeting-place. Their counsel was 
how that they might take Jesus by subtlety and kill Him. 
Their conclusion was, ‘Not during the feast, lest a tumult 
arise among the people.” These Jewish leaders knew the 
price that they would have to pay for the creating of a 
tumult, because they well knew the character of Pontius 
Pilate, and how that vengeance would be wreaked on the 
leaders of such an uprising. 

It was to this group, enemies of Christ, bent on taking His 
life, that Judas went. Just why Judas came to the state of 
mind that he did, is interesting to contemplate. It seems 
as though the darkness had been gradually gathering over 
his head, and as Luke 22:3 states, “Satan entered into 
Judas.” The state to which he came is, as understood by 
Edersheim, as follows: 

“It is a terrible night-study, that of Judas. We seem to 
tread our way over loose stones of hot molten lava, as we 
climb to the edge of the crater, and shudderingly look down 
its depths. And yet there, near there, have stood not only 
St. Peter in the midst of his denial, but mostly all of us, save 
they whose Angels have always looked up into the Face of 


308 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


our Father in heaven. And yet, in our weakness, we have 
even wept over them! There, near there, have we stood, 
not in the hours of our weakness, but in those of our sore 
temptation, when the blast of doubt had almost quenched 
the flickering light, or the storm of passion or of self-will 
broken the bruised reed. But He prayed for us —and 
through the night came over desolate moor and stony height 
the Light of His Presence, and above the wild storm rose 
the Voice of Him who has come to seek and to save that 
which was lost. Yet near to us, close to us, was the dark 
abyss; and we can never more forget our last, almost slid- 
ing, foothold as we quitted its edge. A terrible night-study, 
this of Judas.” 

“Judas, the man of Kerioth, was the only one of the 
twelve disciples who came from Judza.” He carried the 
bag and must, therefore, have had administrative ability. It 
has been wondered why Jesus ever comimitted this work to 
him, and has been stated that it was probably that he was 
naturally fitted for government, and that the Master, there- 
fore, gave him this work to keep him from brooding dissatis- 
faction, alienation, and even apostasy. But, on the other 
hand, one’s gift may be his downfall, as was, evidently, so 
with Judas. 

Certainly Judas must have experienced the wonderful 
works of Jesus, as did the other apostles, but he was evi- 
dently disappointed when the Master kept looking forward 
to a Cross rather than a Crown. He could not bear to hear 
Jesus praise a woman who lavished ointment worth 300 
pence. That seemed to him to be wasteful extravagance. 
This is indicative of his character, and of what he valued. 
So when he had heard it announced repeatedly by the Master 
Himself that He was to be crucified, and when he learned 
that the chief priests and elders of the people were bent on 
this business, he evidently thought that he may as well get 
something out of it, so he sold himself to dog the Master’s 
steps and watch for an opportunity to turn Him over to 
those who would crucify Him. 

Being one of the disciples, and familiar with the habits 
of the Master, he was well qualified to do this dastardly 
deed. He finally came to the point where he sold himself 


THE PASSION WEEK 309 


as well as the Master, with the question, ‘“What are you 
willing to give me, and I will deliver him unto you?” ‘Thus 
he bargained for 30 pieces of silver, equal to 3 pounds and 
15 shillings, or $18.25. This was the literal fulfillment of 
Zech. 11, for the money was actually weighed out of the 
temple treasury. It was the legal price of a slave. Pos- 
sibly by paying this price, the chief priests and elders 
thought that by some legal fiction, they could clear their own 
consciences. It is to be observed that the Lord who became 
the Servant of servants, was paid for out of the temple 
money, which was used for the purchase of sacrifices, and 
hence this is all wrought with deep symbolic significance. 

After Judas, however, had sold his Lord, he had to reckon 
with his conscience. This faithful monitor of the soul 
brought him into utter desolation and into a dense darkness, 
deeper than that of the night of the betrayal, when with 
the kiss, he betrayed the Innocent. What could he do but 
rush back to his purchasers and throw the accursed money 
clanging at their feet, and then cry out in bitter agony of 
soul, “I have betrayed Innocent Blood.” 

Judas was then friendless, for the heartless priests and 
elders sent him lurching and lunging back into the darkness 
to the death of suicide. One cannot but wonder about the 
soul of Judas, and as to whether or not there was eternal 
compassion for the betrayal of Christ, or on the other hand, 
whether he was ever aught than Jesus named him, “a 
devil” ? 


Thursday (Sections 133-135) 


§ 133. The Last Supper. Mat. 26: 17-30; Mark 14: 12- 
26; Luke 22: 7-30; John 13: 1-30. 


The first day of the feast of unleavened bread was the 
14th of Nisan. This was also called the preparation of the 
Passover. The two feasts are sometimes included in the 
term “Passover,” or that of “Unleavened Bread.” ‘The 
offering of the Lamb took place on the 14th at the evening 
of sacrifice. The paschal lamb was celebrated after sunset 
on the 14th, that is, strictly speaking, on the 15th of Nisan. 
We recall, as Section 82 states, that the brethren of Jesus 


310 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


desired Him to go up to the feast of tabernacles in order 
that He might manifest Himself to the world. At that time 
Jesus said, ‘““My time has not yet come.” However, here 
He speaks in a different tone and says, ‘My time is at hand.” 
Hence He instructed His disciples to arrange for the pass- 
over at the house of a certain man. 

Luke 22:14 states that ‘‘when the hour was come, he sat 
down and his disciples with him.” ‘Then He said to them, 
“With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you 
before I suffer.” Evidently this was the first passover that 
He in person presided over. So at His first, last and only 
passover the sacrifice which He offered was symbolic of 
Himself. Here He anticipated Himself as the “Lamb of 
God suffering” and He was about to suffer, as does a lamb, 
in silence. ‘This occasion joined the old dispensation with 
the new, for Christ was at once the passover lamb and the 
bread of life. It is quite significant that His public min- 
istry began with the ordinance or sacrament of baptism, 
and that it ended with that of the Lord’s Supper. The 
former ordinance is significant of our entrance into the new 
life and the latter signifies our being sustained in this life. 

John 13 deals first with the Master manifesting His 
limitless love towards His disciples. He did this by wash- 
ing their feet. The suggestive expression is at the close of 
the first verse, ‘‘He loved them unto the end,” or, as the 
margin reads, “to the uttermost.” I prefer the translation, 
“He loved them to the limit,” and recall 1 Corinthians 13: 
8, “Love never faileth.”” This speaks of love’s constancy. 
We first observe that the consciousness of death’s nearness 
did not deter Him from manifesting His love. He knew 
that His hour was come, yet He continued to love unper- 
turbed. 

Then we observe that the presence of Judas, His enemy, 
did not prevent His manifesting His love. As verse 21 
says, “He was troubled in spirit and testified . . . one of 
you shall betray me,’ yet the presence of the traitor did not 
prevent Jesus from washing His disciples’ feet, nor indeed 
those of Judas. See verse 12. 

Then we are overwhelmed as we note that Jesus washed 
His disciples’ feet conscious of His place and power. “The 


THE PASSION WEEK 31] 


Father had given all things into his hands.” Jesus acted, 
therefore, from the purest of motives with no ulterior ob- 
ject in mind. 

As we think of His humble service here, we see in it His 
originality and initiative. ‘He riseth from supper,” verse 
4. He left His place of honor in order to do this. His ob- 
ject evidently was to give them an example. As He said, 
His hope was that the example would be more instructive 
to them than mere words. What they would see with their 
own eyes would be more impressive than precept. Papini 
says, “For raw, untrained minds action has more meaning 
than words.” So at personal discomfort and at the expense 
of His own dignity, He manifested His love by the washing 
of His disciples’ feet. The author referred to above says, 
“Only a mother or a slave would have done what Jesus did 
that evening. The mother for her little children, but no 
one else; the slave for his master, but for no other.” 

We are interested to see how the Master’s love was re- 
ceived and our only gauge is Peter who at first resented the 
Lord’s washing his feet (v. 6). Said he, “Washest Thou 
my feet?” ‘The incongruity of it shocked Peter. They had 
not washed one another’s feet, why should He wash theirs? 
But Peter’s ignorance of the real significance of the act was 
apparent to Christ (v. 7). Here Peter represents a group 
of fastidious philosophers who see only the new, naked, raw, 
bald, historical Roman crucifixion. So for them Calvary has 
no romance and hence for their sins there is no remission. 
Compare 1 Cor. 1: 18-25. 

Peter not only resented but refused to permit the Lord to 
wash his feet (v. 8), but in so doing he forgot the Master’s 
Lordship and was reminded, * ‘If I wash thee not, thou hast 
no part with me.” There is a tendency to overlook the 
sovereignty of God and to dictate terms to Him, forgetting 
that He is free to work as He will and where He will. 

Then, when Peter saw and comprehended without reser- 
vation, with childish enthusiasm, with the boom of abandon- 
ment, he said, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands 
and my head.” ‘This is the ideal. Real saints understand 
this. 

We are amazed that Judas’ feet were washed also, but in 


312 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


a deeper sense Judas was the feet of the disciples that day, 
as verses 10 and 11 indicate. Said the Master, ‘He that 1s 
bathed needeth not save to wash his feet.”” They had come 
from the public bath to the feast, but in coming their feet 
had been contaminated with the dust of the wayside. There- 
fore, when Jesus said, “Ye are clean, but not all,” He fol- 
lowed that statement with, “He knew him that should be- 
tray him; therefore said he, ye are not all clean.” Poor 
Judas was disappointed at Christ’s extravagances. He 
looked for the setting up of the Kingdom at once and hoped 
to become Secretary of the Treasury. Failure in this piqued 
him. 

We observe then how Christ instructed His disciples by 
His act of love here: 


(1) Cleansing goes with discipleship; sanctification goes 
with justification. We should be specific and par- 
ticular. See verse 10. 

(2) Humble service, altruism, should be their ideal (vs. 
12-17). ‘The evangelical church in general has 
agreed that this act of Jesus was symbolical of 
service and that it need not be literally followed 
in our day. During the first 300 years of the 
Church it was so understood. It was evidently an 
act of hospitality then and there. The Synod of 
Elvira, 306, condemned the practice of feet wash- 
ing, though some since and yet observe it. 

(3) fea comes from action rather than knowledge 

V./1/)- : 

(4) A contrast of this service with the conduct of Judas 
makes love resplendent. It is as a candle burning 
in the night. 


Then Christ plainly stated, “Verily, verily, I say unto you 
that one of you shall betray me.” Upon this His disciples 
were confused. Simon Peter in his accustomed eagerness 
beckoned to John, who reclined on Jesus’ bosom, that he 
would get from Him the secret as to who the traitor was. 
Thereupon John leaned back on Jesus breast and said, “Lord, 
who is it?” ‘The Master’s reply was that it would be he 
“for whom I shall dip the sop and give it to him.” Then 


THE PASSION WEEK 313 


the sop was given by Jesus to Judas. ‘Then we read the 
horrifying statement, “Satan entered into him” and Jesus 
urged “that thou doest, do quickly.” This was all done 
secretly. Jesus evidently had whispered His answer to 
John and also carried on the conversation with Judas 
secretly. Therefore, ‘no man at the table knew for what 
intent, he spake unto him.” Verse 29 indicates that the dis- 
ciples thought Jesus gave Judas instructions about the use 
of the money. Then follows one of the most ominous words 
of sacred Scripture, “He then having received the sop went 
out straightway: and it was night.” It was not only the 
hour of night but it was night, black darkness, for the soul 
of Judas. 

As Luke records, ‘““There arose also contention among 
them which of them is accounted to be greatest.’”’ Whether 
this contention preceded or followed the washing of the dis- 
ciples’ feet is problematic, but Edersheim, believes that this 
contention grew out of the order of their seating around 
the table and that Judas got the seat of honor to the left of 
Jesus, while John was on Jesus’ right. 

We naturally feel the pity of all this strife on such an 
occasion, inasmuch as the striving was for place, prominence 
and pre-eminence, not for another but for self. But such 
striving was Rabbinical, not Christian, so the Master in- 
structed them that their ways were wordly and Gentile. We 
can hardly imagine that this strife could occur after Jesus 
washed the disciples’ feet, but if it did, it indicates how 
utterly obtuse were even the twelve in their spiritual sensi- 
bilities. In order that Jesus might show them that His 
kingdom was not of this world He recalled to them the 
well-known standards of the Gentiles (Luke 22: 25-27). 
Then He said, “But I am in the midst of you as he that 
serveth.” He was aiming to teach them that honor goeth 
before humility. Compare 1 Pet. 5:5 and Phil. 2: 1-11. 
This latter passage records the kenosis of our Lord which 
precedes and prepares for exaltation. Men have marvelled 
that Jesus ever entrusted His kingdom to these humble men 
who did not seem to make rapid strides in things spiritual, 
yet the Master knew to trust them and to believe that His 
teaching would bear fruit, and so He even promised, “I ap- 


314 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


point unto you a kingdom even as my Father appointed 
unto me. . . ye shall sit on thrones judging the twelve 
tribes of Israel.” Jesus could trust them because He counted 
on their success. 

Then followed the institution of the Lord’s Supper, this 
ordinance which has meant so much for the spiritual life of 
the church. It was evidently eaten every first day of the 
week in the early church and some communions to this day 
so observe it. ‘The bread fitly represents His body and the 
cup His blood. Extreme literalists read transubstantiation 
into “This is my body,” but in humble reply we ask, “How 
could the bread have been His literal body since He was 
then in His literal body?” But whosoever eats of the loaf 
dedicated to this holy use, takes in Christ spiritually. As 
to the cup, the Master said, “Drink ye all of it.” The word 
“all” is of course in the nominative case and the statement 
clearly means, “All ye drink from it.” None were to be 
excluded. ‘Thus they were sustained, as the bread would 
suggest, and thus were they assured of their cleansing from 
sin as the flowing wine, representing the blood of Christ, 
suggests. ‘Then, this reminds us of “the covenant.” This 
is the new and better covenant of which Hebrews 7 and 8 
speak so fully, which is based entirely upon the promise and 
character of God, not upon the works and worth of man. 
As Paul said, “As oft as ye eat this bread and drink this 
blood, ye do show forth the Lord’s death till He come.” 
This communion ordinance, therefore, is a memorial of 
God’s covenant by which we have our cleansing, “unto re- 
mission of sin.” Shall we not think of this with respect to 
the new covenant as we think of the rainbow with respect 
to the Noahic covenant? It is the token. After this supper, 
the Master promised that He would “drink it new, with you 
in my Father’s kingdom.” Then followed the hymn and 
going to the Mount of Olives. 


§ 134. Christ’s Farewell Discourses. Mat. 26: 31-35; 
nate 14: 27-31; Luke 22: 31-38; John 13: 31- 
; 33. 


During the Passover meal, Jesus, by the giving of the 
sop (John 13:26) to Judas, indicated who should betray 


THE PASSION WEEK 315 


Him. Then Judas “went out straightway” to “do quickly” 
the dastardly deed. Then occurred that unfortunate, and 
alas, often since repeated quarrel or contention among His 
disciples, as to “‘which of them is accounted to be greatest.” 
The Master availed Himself of the occasion to teach them 
that “‘he that is chief” is ‘“‘he that doth serve.” 

Then followed the institution of the Lord’s Supper. 

The “Farewell Discourses” were probably all spoken be- 
fore Christ and His disciples had left the Passover chamber. 

Judas’ going out was ominous to Jesus. So He said, 
“Now the Son of man is glorified,” ete. (John 13:31). 
Evidently the exit of Judas was to Jesus the first act in the 
drama of His death; and He with supernatural buoyancy 
rode over the turbulent sea of pain and death, in His 
imagination, and spoke only of the victory side to His 
timorous disciples. 

How tender must He have become when He said to them: 
“Little children, yet a little while I am with you . 
Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say unto you.” 
He had said this to the Jews. Now He says it to His dis- 
ciples. He had left the Jews. ‘Their house was left unto 
them desolate. Now He is about to separate from His 
chosen, 

Therefore said He, “Love one another; even as I have 
loved you. . . By this shall all men know that ye are my 
disciples, if ye have love one to another.” 

Peter, inquisitive and expressive as usual, then asked, 
“Lord, whither goest thou?” The answer is a study. 
(John 13:36). Peter desired to accompany Jesus. But, 
Sainte words not......’. now ; Sbutwyess), afterwards.” 
Peter would know ‘“‘why cannot I follow thee even now?” 
“I will lay down my life’ for Thee. Peter felt he could 
make the supreme sacrifice for His Master, and he meant 
well. One has said he loved most “extensively” if not most 
intensely. But Jesus, knowing his weakness, predicted his 
denial of his Lord ere the cock would crow. 

Said Jesus, “All ye shall be offended in me this night.” 
When the shepherd would be smitten, then would the sheep 
be scattered. Even Peter, so insistent that he would not 
be offended, was about to deny his Lord. Satan had “out- 


316 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


asked” for Peter that he might sift him as wheat. Jesus 
had made supplication for him that his faith might not fail. 
Though Satan was permitted to “sift” Peter, yet Jesus had 
prevailed and Peter’s faith would hold. 

Then in Luke 22: 35-38 Jesus tells them of the need of 
their being prepared with “purse,” “wallet” and “sword” 
since ““He was reckoned with transgressors.” 

Chapters 14, 15 and 16 of John contain the Lord’s fare- 
well addresses. The contents of the 14th chapter are well 
suited to comfort the hearts of the disciples clouded with 
sorrow at the thought of separating from their Master. 
The Jews had the idea that those in glory occupied different 
bodies, which correspond to their stations in life. Jesus 
assured them that “If I go and prepare a place for you, I 
will come again and will receive you unto myself.” Though 
in His Father’s house there were “many mansions,’ yet 
they would be with Him there. 

Thomas then inquires as to the way, and Jesus assures 
him that He Himself is the way. Confidence in Christ 
guarantees that there will be no missing of the way. So 
this 14th chapter is both comforting and informing. 

Philip is quite a literalist, and when Jesus refers to the * 
Fathers, says, “Lord, show us the Father and it sufficeth 
us.” Then in verse 9 Jesus clears up the matter by indicat- 
ing that He is the manifestationyof the Father. 

Then to instruct them and encourage them further He 
says that because He goes to the Father, they who believe on 
Him would do His works, and even greater works. We 
now understand the meaning of that word when we re- 
member how that the Holy Spirit, being poured forth upon 
His Ascension, enabled His disciples to do these greater 
works. And today this same Holy Spirit, filling us, enables 
us to carry on the work of Christ. He was limited by His 
having only one body; whereas, today His disciples and 
ambassadors are scattered world-wide. So Jesus speaks of 
“another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever.” 
_ Knowing that He had not succeeded in imparting to 
them all that they should know, and evidently believing that 
they were aware of their lack of knowledge, Christ assured 
His disciples that the Holy Spirit “shall teach you all 


THE PASSION WEEK 317 


things,” etc. vs. 25, 26. So this chapter closes with the 
beautiful words, “Peace I leave with you,” etc. cathe 

Then in Chapter 15 our Lord stresses the importance of 
constant contact with Himself by using the figure of the 
Vine. The Father is the Husbandman; Christ is the true 
Vine, and His disciples are the branches. He urges that 
they abide in Him in order that the Husbandman may re- 
ceive fruit from their lives. This fruit-bearing is of primary 
importance. As Jesus said, “Herein is my Father glorified 
that ye bear much fruit, and so shall ye be my disciples.” 

But He intimates that along with this abiding life, there 
will be the cleansing of the Heavenly Husbandman. Prun- 
ing will be necessary; so Christ here deals with a very 
important truth—that the life and fruit of the believer is 
communicated to him from the Vine, Christ Jesus, and this 
is the necessary process by which the Father is gratified and 
glorified. This abiding is realized by an adherence to 
Christ’s commandments, the greatest of which is “that ye 
may love.” 

So while John 14 speaks of comfort and communion, 
John 15 stresses the communication of the divine life to 
the believer as the necessary source of fruit bearing. 

In chapter 16, verse 1, the Master states why He gave 
these farewell addresses: “These things have I spoken unto 
you that ye should not stumble.” Christ was aware of the 
trials that were before them, not simply the great test of 
His death, but the after trials, to which they would be 
subjected after His Ascension. Said He, “The hour cometh 
that whosoever killeth you will think that He offereth serv- 
ice unto God.” Christ is foretelling them of these things 
in order that they might be prepared for the worst. 

In verse 5 Jesus reminded them that not one had asked 
Him, “Whither goest thou?” Thomas’ question, (14:5), 
dealt more with the way than the destination. Sorrow had 
filled their hearts, and they had become engrossed in their 
own loss rather than interested in the place to which their 
Master was going. But Jesus assures them that His depart- 
ure is necessary to the coming of the Comforter, whom He 
would send, and who did, when He came, convict the world 
in respect of sin, righteousness and judgment. Dealing 


318 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


briefly on the great effective work of the Spirit, Jesus then 
tells them that they were unable to bear all that He had to 
tell them, but that the Spirit of Truth would guide them 
further into all truth. He assured them that this Spirit 
would be faithful to the Father and Himself. (16: 13-15.) 
So He tells them that they would be scrutinizing Him care- 
fully just a little while, alluding to the short time He had 
with them before His trial and death, and then after a little 
time again, referring to the time He would spend in the 
tomb, they would see Him again. Thus He instructs them 
and quiets their fears. He tells them that sorrow was 
directly ahead, but that it would soon be transformed into 
joy, just as the mother forgets the pain of travail in the 
joy of the man-child born into the world. 


Then He assures them that they will have recourse directly 
to the Father, through His name, in prayer. They had 
been accustomed to come to Him; henceforth they would 
go to the Father through Him. 


The closing verses of John 16 give the purpose of these 
discourses. Said He, “These things have I spoken unto 
you, that in me ye might have peace.” Faithfully and 
fully He spoke of their tribulation, but in the same breath 
bade them “‘Be of good cheer,” since He, the Vine, of which 
they were the branches, and hence of whose life they were 
partaking, had overcome the world. 


§ 135. The Intercessory Prayer. John 17. 


When we come to this prayer we have what is really “the 
Lord’s Prayer.” ‘The first part of it has been regarded as 
the High Priest consecrating Himself. The hour had ar- 
rived. Now the Father must glorify the Son in order that 
God might be glorified. Christ was concerned that “all” 
(pan); that is, the totality that had been given him, should 
receive eternal life. Jesus was eager that every one for 
whom He was about to die should receive eternal life, which 
He said was “knowing the only true God, and Him whom 
Thou didst send, even Jesus Christ.” 


This prayer is evidently one of final committal on the 
part of Christ, who is about to be offered as the Lamb of 


THE PASSION WEEK 319 


God for the sins of the world, and He is dependant upon 
the Father that His sacrifice might avail, and that through 
His death men might come to know God, which knowledge 
is synonymous with eternal life. He made bold to say, “I 
manifested thy name unto them thou gavest me out of the 
world.” He had faithfully revealed God to His disciples, 
who believed that He was sent of God. So on this occa- 
sion He prays for them especially, rather than for the world. 
In this prayer, He recognizes that His Father’s interests are 
His, and His are His Father’s, (verse 10). He is about 
to leave the world, but His disciples are to be left behind, 
and He will be glorified in Him; hence, He prays the 
Father to keep them that have been given to Him; and He 
prays for their unity in the words, “That they may be one, 
even as we.” He reminds the Father that His protective 
care has been effectual with but the loss of the son of 
perdition that the Scriptures might be fulfilled. ‘The bur- 
den, therefore, of this prayer is that His disciples should 
be kept in the world from the evil. 

Fle anticipates that they will encounter the antagonism 
of the world, since they are not of it, even as He is not of 
it, and He prays for their sanctification by the truth. 

Then He enlarges the circle of His prayer and petitions 
on behalf of those who shall believe through His disciples. 
The church by schisms rent asunder and heresies distressed 
must read more carefully these last words of the Great 
Head: “That they may all be one.” The importance of 
this is seen in the close, ‘That the world may believe that 
thou didst send me.”’ Can the church do less than make it 
evident to the world that we are “one in faith and doctrine : 
one in charity?” Let us, therefore, often say : “In essentials, 
unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.” 
~ Then He prays that these that had been given to Him 
may in Him behold His glory which the Father had given 
Him, and He tenderly reminds the Father of the eternal 
jlove with which the Father loved Him. He implies that 
jnow the Father must love those that are in Him. It is as 
a groom bringing His bride to His Father’s house and 
expecting her to share the love that has been extended to 


320 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


him by his parents. Then He prays that God may vouch- 
safe to His followers that love that the Father had for Him. 


Friday 


§ 136. Jesus in Gethsemane. Mat. 26: 36-46; Mark 
14: 32-42; Luke 22: 39-46; John 18: 1. 


Who prefers to write on “Jesus in Gethsemane?’ One 
could with better grace speak in hushed tones. The scene is 
so solemn! The agony undergone by ‘“The Man of Sorrows” 
has never been experienced by another. The gloom of His 
soul, made all the darker by the night which enveloped Him 
and His sleeping disciples, cannot be penetrated by the dim 
light of reason. Any attempt to explain what transpired 
in the ‘“Garden” seems as inappropriate as were the “swords 
and staves” carried by that base multitude which had armed 
itself to apprehend Him who bade Peter “Put up again thy 
sword into the place.” So as we approach Gethsemane we 
shall take off our shoes and speak in subdued tones. Our 
reasonings, and especially our words, may seem as intrusive 
as was the traitor’s kiss upon the Saviour’s solitude. 

The Gospels simply tell the story. That is enough. Yet 
the irreverent have dared to maintain that Gethsemane saw 
imperfection in Christ. They would have Him more stoical. 
But “He became an example for gentle womanhood, and 
tender childhood, as well as man boastful of his stoicism.” 
Before Pilate He was firm; upon the Cross He “won the 
adoration of a fellowsufferer and the confession of a Roman 
soldier.” His fortitude has made those who love Him 
“stronger to endure tortures than were emperors and 
inquisitors to invent them.”’ G. A. Chadwick, D.D. 

Here we behold enacted the ‘Terrible Drama of the 
night.’ The Saviour, as He sweat “great drops of blood” 
(Lk. 22:44), is alone. The dense darkness and the grief, 
which acted as an anodyne to rest and sleep for the disciples, 
only added to His desolateness and pain. The “cup” could 
not pass from Him. The disciples could not watch with 
Him. He drank the dreadful draught to the dregs, destitute. 


THE PASSION WEEK 321 


Outline. Mark. 


The Seclusion of the Saviour. (vs. 33-35.) 
1. From Judas and his associates—Antipathy. 
2. From “the eight” (vs. 32, 33)—Apathy. 
3. From “the three” (v. 35)—Sympathy. 
II, The Sorrow of the Saviour. (vs. 33, 34.) 

1, “Greatly amazed” (v. 33)— Surprised. 

2. “Sore troubled” (v. 33)—Desolation. 

3. “Exceeding sorrowful” (v. 34)—Deluge. 
III. The Supplication of the Saviour. (vs, 35-39.) 
1. For release. (v. 35.) 
2. In resignation. (v. 36.) 
Ban repetition), Vio.) 


IV. The Sleep of the Disciples. (vs. 37-41.) 
leebower oft’), Gv.,37,) 
2. Perplexity caused by it. (v. 37.) 
3. Place for it. (v. 41.) 


It was past midnight on that last Thursday night of our 
Lord’s life before the crucifixion. The Passover Supper 
had been prepared and eaten. Christ had rebuked the 
disciples by washing their feet. Judas, the traitor, had been 
designated and had withdrawn. The Lord’s supper had 
been instituted. The closing prayer had been offered. And 
then “when they had sung an hymn, they went out unto 
the Mount of Olives.” 

As the “Man of Sorrows and acquainted with grief” ap- 
proached the supreme test, the trying ordeal of Calvary, He 
found Himself alone, torn by soul agony. But though for- 
saken, He was not alone indeed. Prayer connected Him 
with heaven. 

I. The Seclusion of the Saviour. (vs. 33-35.) 

32. “They came unto a place.” “Place” means an enclosed 
piece of ground, “‘a garden,” in the Eastern sense, a “lowly, 
quiet, summer retreat, connected with, or near by, the ‘Olive 
press.’” The Saviour sought a sequestered spot for His 
season of sorrow. 

“Gethsemane”—‘Passing out by the north gate of the 
Temple. ...descend into a lonely part of the valley of black 

21 


ro 


322 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


Kidron, at that season swelled into a winter torrent. Cross- 
ing it, turn somewhat to the left, where the road leads to- 
wards Olivet.... Turn aside. ...to the right and reach what 
tradition has since earliest times pointed out as ‘Gethsemane 
—The Oil-Press.’ ” 

From the “Garden of Eden” the First Adam was driven 
defeated; from the “Garden of Gethsemane” the second 
Adam was led as a prisoner, yet, strange paradox, a Victor. 
In the solitude of the Garden He had won a moral victory 
greater than which there never was another. 

His disciples. The eight were left behind as the context 
shows. It has been pointed out that there is no record ever 
of Christ praying with his disciples. He gave them a form 
of prayer, but when He had occasion to pray He said, 
“Sit ye here, while I pray’—. Evidently their presence 
and prayers would have been no help to Him. No one 
would think of accusing the Master of partiality. The eight 
were simply not needed in His company while He prayed. 
He knew them. It were best for Him, for His cause and 
maybe for them, that they be at a distance from Him dur- 
ing His agonizing prayers. 

v. 33. “He taketh with Him Peter and James and John.” 
“Companions before of His glory, both when He raised 
the daughter of Jairus and on the Mount of Transfigura- 
tion.” —Edersheim. Whatever fellowship he might crave; 
whatever consolation He might covet, these three were the 
natural ones to give it to Him. What Christian would not 
desire this preferred place? Surely it is laudable to long 
to be in the “Inner Circle,” to be one of the “elect of His 
election.”’ 

v. 35. “And he went forward a little.” He left the three, 
but they were near. It was only “a little’ distance between 
Him and them. Evidently He desired them to be at hand 
even though they could not help Him carry His load. Christ 
appreciated companionship. He was perfectly human as 
well as perfectly divine. 

II. The Sorrow of the Saviour. (vs. 33, 34.) 

v. 33b. “Began to be greatly amazed.” The Greek word 
(ekthambeisthai) here used indicates that Jesus met that 
which surprised Him. Wyclif has it “began to dread.” 


THE PASSION WEEK 323 


The word is used in 9:15 to describe the amazement of 
the people when they saw the Lord after the Transfiguration. 
Also in 16: 5, 6, it is applied to the women at the sepulchre. 
—Cambridge Bible. 

“Sore troubled.” In Philippians 2:26 the word is ren- 
dered “full of heaviness.” “Buttmann suggests that the root 
idea is that of being “away from home” and so “confused,” 
“beside one’s self.” The main notion seems to be that 
Christ was desolate. His isolation pained Him. ‘Those 
most intimate with Him were far from appreciating His 
distress. 

v. 34. “My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death.” 
“Perilypos” is the Greek word here used. It signifies not 
simply a shower of sorrow, but a deluge. It seems to the 
Master as though He will be buried beneath the ever in- 
creasing weight of grief. “Even unto death” suggests that 
He saw death stalking before Him. Was the load of the 
sins of the race being laid upon His shoulders with such 
incalculable ponderosity that it endangered the life of even 
the God-man? Or, as some think, was Satan attempting 
to take His life ere He atoned for our sins? We rejoice 
that as Hebrews 5: 7 says, “When he had offered up prayers 
and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, 
and was heard in that he feared.” ‘Abide ye here and 
_ watch.” Though Jesus must fight out the battle alone yet 
He will be comforted to believe that some care. They can 
at least watch to see how it goes with Him. They can listen 
while He prays. They can be eager for His victory. 
III. The Supplication of the Saviour. (vs. 35-39.) 

v. 35b. “And fell on the ground and prayed.” ‘The fact 
that Jesus “fell upon the ground” indicates how strongly the 
sorrow had taken hold upon Him. He was nearly over- 
whelmed by it. The fact that He prayed as He did shows 
Fis need of support above the human. “If it were possible.” 
So Jesus prayed. The Greek conditional here used indicates 
that Jesus saw such a possibility. Verse 36 seems to teach 
the same thing. “The hour might pass away from him.” 
How long that hour must have seemed. During periods of 
intense pain, minutes seem to be hours and hours weeks or 
months. Jesus prayed, at first, for “surcease of sorrow,” ’ 


324 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


for the ending of that seemingly interminable time of tor- 
ture. 

v. 36. “Abba Father.” Matthew 26:39 has “O my 
Father,” etc. Luke 22: 42 has “Father,” etc., as also has John 
12:27. On this passage St. Jerome wrote in Latin “dicitque 
blandiens; Mi Pater;” i. e., “And He says coaxing, My 
Father.” What pleading! How His appeal must have 
touched the heart of our Father God, whom Jesus came to 
reveal. Cold calculating critics have seen too much senti- 
ment and too little strength in our Saviour here, but, as 
Chadwick in the Expositors Bible suggests, Jesus had a 
sensitive soul. He was sinless. His heart had never been 
calloused. He did not attempt to act unnaturally and affect 
a hardihood past his real feelings. Then He was and is the 
Saviour of the women and children as well as the stoical 
men. So He candidly displayed His true self. 

“All things are possible unto thee.” So we sometimes 
pray. ‘God is able’ is a true acknowledgment of divine 
omnipotence, yet God does not always grant our particular 
petitions, for to do so would not be to our best interests. 
‘Remove this cup.” How bitter the cup and how much it 
contained! “Howbeit, not what I will but what thou wilt.” 
No longer for relief from the hour, but in resignation He 
prays. This “howbeit’’ marks the moment of victory. Fol- 
lowing this abandonment to God’s will Luke 22:43 states 
“And there appeared unto him an angel from heaven, 
strengthening him.” This is a beautiful human touch from 
Luke, whose next verse tells us that Christ so agonized that 
“His sweat became as it were great drops of blood falling 
down upon the ground.” 

v. 39. “Prayed, saying the same words.”’ He had won a 
great moral victory. He took a stand and stood there. He 
did not revise His word nor reverse His decision. What 
grand constancy and consistency! | 

IV. The Sleep of the Disciples. (vs. 37-41.) 

v. 37. “He cometh and findeth them sleeping.” From His 
agonizing supplication He turned to His disciples for solace, 
but found them sleeping. Says Edersheim, “While He lay 
in prayer, they lay in sleep; and yet where soul-agony 
leads not to the one, it often induces the other.” 


THE PASSION WEEK 325 


“Saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou?” etc. Doubtless 
these words roused all the sleepers. They indicate the 
surprise of the suffering Saviour. Do we ever sleep when 
we should be wakeful in the interests of our Master? 
“Watch one hour.” Just one hour, yet it was too long for 
the weary disciples. How limited is the strength of man! 
How scanty is our reserve power! 

v. 38. “Watch and pray that ye enter not into tempta- 
tion.” Jesus warns Peter and his associates of coming temp- 
tation, which may be warded off by watching, anticipating, 
its approach, and prayer, petitioning heaven to help. By 
“watching” we do our share to keep from yielding to temp- 
tation; by “prayer” we obtain God’s aid to help us. 

“The spirit is willing;” i. e., ready, ardent. One may 
be aglow with enthusiasm, yet if this is only human, it will 
be offset because “the flesh is weak.” We need prayer to 
keep us in contact with God and so “strong in the Lord 
and the power of His might.” 

v. 41. “Sleep on now, and take your rest.” ‘These words 
were a rebuke to their languor, their stupidity, their seem- 
ing indifference. Yet they were in place. Why should they 
be awake after the victory had been won if they slept 
during the battle? All may sleep when the work is done, 
when the task is completed. ‘After three assaults had the 
Tempter left Him in the wilderness; after the threefold 
conflict in the Garden he was vanquished. Christ came forth 
triumphant.”—Edersheim. 

“The hour is come.” He had prayed to be saved from 
the “hour” but strange as it may seem, the prayer that He 
had hoped would save Him from that hour only prepared 
Him for it. So He bravely faces the “hour.” 

“The Son of man is betrayed.” Judas had bargained 
with “sinners” for his Lord’s life. Eager for money al- 
ways, coveting even what loving hearts spent on the Person 
of Christ, he now realizes a few paltry dollars, “Tainted 
money,” “blood money,” in exchange for our Lord’s life. 
And, sad, it is, though all too true, Judas was not the last 
to barter Christ for money. Money is valued because it 
can be exchanged for “things,” but he that has Christ pos- 
sesses “everything.” 


326 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“Arise, let us be going.” Since all were awake, and Jesus 
had won in Gethsemane, why tarry there? He seems eager 
to go on undaunted to the last long day of His pre-cruci- 
fixion life. He is ready to lay down His life. 


$137. The Betrayal and Arrest. Mat. 27: 47-56; 
eer 14: 43-52; Luke 22: 47-53; John 18: 
12: 


The betrayal and arrest of our Master was a dark deed. 
Jesus was in the Garden at Gethsemane, deserted by His 
disciples who had gone to sleep. In the desolation of His 
own soul, He had enacted the terrible drama of the night. 
Afterward, having fought out the battle alone, He had 
awakened His disciples with the words, “Sleep on now and 
take your rest.” Then He had warned them that the traitor 
was at hand, Judas, who had been one of the twelve, ap- 
proached Him with a great multitude, carrying swords and 
staves, having been sent from the chief priests and elders 
of the people. Judas saluted Jesus with, “Hail, Rabbi,” 
and a kiss of endearment; or, as Matthew indicates, “he 
kissed Him much.” ‘The picture represents foul play and 
was so seen by the rugged Peter, whose soul was so stirred 
that he retaliated with the sword, but Jesus touched the ear 
that Peter had severed and healed it. His rebuke to Peter 
was telling. Jesus had fought out the battle as Peter slept 
and needed not the rugged apostle’s sword, as He could 
have called on the Father, who would have sent Him more 
than twelve legions of angels, but then the Scriptures would 
not have been fulfilled. So He permitted Himself to be 
taken. When those who were taking Jesus attempted to 
take a certain young man (Mark 14:51), “he fled naked.” 
This young man was evidently Mark, the writer of the 
second Gospel. 


§ 138. The Trial Before the Jewish Authorities. Mat. 
26: 57—27:10; Luke 22: 54-71; John 18: 12- 
27; Mark 14: 53-72. 


This band that had seized Jesus brought Him to Annas 
whom Christ disdained. This Annas was the father-in-law 


THE PASSION WEEK 327 


of Caiaphas. He evidently was a political diplomat, some- 
what greedy for filthy lucre. When the high priest, 
Caiaphas, asked Jesus of His disciples and His teaching, 
He was reminded by the Master that He had taught openly 
in the temple and the synagogue so that His teaching was 
generally known, since in secret He had spoken nothing. 
While Jesus was on trial, Peter denied His Lord. 


The self-possession of the Master in the presence of 
Caiaphas is admirable. “Jesus held His peace,” then, when 
the high priest adjured Him by the living God to tell 
whether or not He was the Son of the living God, He 
simply stated, “Thou hast said,” telling with this a prophecy 
of His coming power and glory when He will return in 
the clouds, Thereupon the high priest charged Him of 
blasphemy, Then He was turned over to the ribald soldiery 
to be spit upon, buffeted and smitten. Then Peter’s denial 
had become complete by the three-fold repetition. The cock 
crew; the Lord turned and looked upon Peter who wept 
bitterly. Judas, when he saw that Jesus had been con- 
demned, repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver 
with the statement, “I have sinned in that I have betrayed 
innocent blood.” Matthew’s statement of 27:3, 4 seems 
to indicate that it had gone harder with Jesus than Judas 
had imagined it would. The high priest would have noth- 
ing to do with his repentance and so Judas suffered his 
remorse alone. We are here reminded of Esau’s unayail- 
ing tears and of the line “To pass that limit is to die.” 


§ 139. Christ Before Pilate. Mat. 27: 11-31; Mark 15: 
1-20; Luke 23: 1-25; Jno, 18: 28-19; 16a. 


It will be helpful in studying the trial of Christ before 
Pilate, to consider the outstanding characters : 

Judas—Before Christ’s trial had been completed, Judas 
had repented of his traitorous deed. Yet his repentance was 
not of godly sorrow. He was remorseful. He suffered 
from a remorse caused by the memory of the bald fact 
of his traitorous act. All the glamour had gone, the lure 
had been lost. He found his soul sullied, and so he came 
back to the Sanhedrists, throwing the cankered gold at their 


| 328 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


feet. Little wonder that remorse gnawed at the very vitals 
of his being as he mplated how his traitorous kiss had 
started Christ to Annas, thence to Caiaphas, thence to Pilate, 
thence to Herod, and then back to Pilate again, to be 
scourged, delivered, and finally crucified. Judas had lost 
Christ, and then lost his gold, his good name, and finally 
his life, for he died a suicide. 

The Sanhedrists. They stand for envy which had filled 
hearts empty of reality. Jesus said, “Every one that is of 
the truth heareth my voice.” John 18:37. These leading 
religionists did not hear his voice and hence were not of 
the truth. They were shams, putting forth a false front. 
They were shells, hollow, though promising. 

Pilate. Regardless of his good intentions and apparent 
innocence, we cannot escape concluding that Pilate was an 
opportunist. As we study him, we note that he was double- 
minded, and hence “unstable in all his ways.” He was 
accustomed to diplomacy, but he never before was compelled 
to decide a matter so fraught with far-reaching possibilities 
for gain or loss to himself, as when Christ was pitted against 
Cesar, and he was compelled to choose. He favored as 
well as feared Christ. He was influenced by his conviction, 
his better judgment, to release Jesus. Said he, “I find no 
fault in this man” and ‘‘What evil hath he done?” Then his 
conscience troubled him when he thought of delivering 
Christ for crucifixion. As Matthew 27:13, 14 suggest, 
Pilate simply marvelled at Christ’s conduct when put to the 
“acid test.” Then Pilate’s wife, by telling him of her 
dream had awakened his conscience. 

We note here that he refused to be responsible for the 
disposition of the Saviour of man, and so indicated this by 
washing his hands. Ordinarily this would have caused any 
crowd to relinquish their demand for the death of one on 
trial, but not so this clamorous mob, incited by the Jewish 
leaders. Had Pilate been other than irresponsible, he doubt- 
less would never have delivered Jesus instead of Barabbas, 
but when he utters, “Ye call him King of the Jews,” (Mark 
15:12), he indicates that he is taking no side. And so he 
is synonymous with moral flabbiness, and as Mark says, 
“Wishing to content the multitude,” he released Barabbas 


THE PASSION WEEK 329 


and delivered Christ. But though he favored the Jews’ 
cause and Cesar’s cause as he thought, he actually opposed 
Czesar by releasing the murderous seditionist, Barabbas. 

Pilate’s wife, embodies that which is true but impotent. 
The multitude. The multitude is fickle, furious, and easily 
excited, They cry “Crucify him,” today, who yesterday 
cried, “Hosanna to the Son of David.” The soldiers. 
These were evidently bloodthirsty degenerates who gloried 
in ribaldry. Christ. Impossible it is to approach any 
portrait of Christ in Pilate’s Hall, but we cannot but note 
how, both while in the custody of Caiaphas the high priest 
and that of Pilate the governor, he was subjected to the 
most uncalled-for ill-treatment. He was falsely accused, 
spit upon, smitten with the hand, and taunted, to say noth- 
ing of being charged with disloyalty to the State and being 
seditious. It was made to appear that he who followed 
Christ was disloyal to Cesar. Christ here became the vic- 
tim of the most unfair and inhuman treatment. 


Outline Mat. 27 


J, Christ Opposed by a Religious System. (v. 1.) 
a. Personnel—‘Chief priests and elders.” 
b. Plan—‘Took counsel against Jesus.” 
c. Purpose—“To put him to death.” 
II. Christ Face to Face with the Roman State. (vs. 2:11- 
14.) | 
a. “Delivered.” 
b. Questioned by Pilate. (v. 11.) 
c. “Accused” by chief priests and elders. (v. 12.) 
d. Held his peace. (vs. 13, 14.) 
III. Christ Encounters Roused Public Sentiment. (vs. 15- 


a. Crowd catered to—‘‘whom they would.” (v. 15.) 
b. Custom clung to—‘‘whom will ye” (v. 17.) 
c. Crucifixion of Christ called for. (vs. 22, 23.) 
IV. Christ Insulted by Ribald Soldiers. (vs, 27-31.) 
a. Inthe Pretorium. (v. 27.) 
b. His Apparel changed. (v. 28.) 
c. His Person abused. (vs. 29, 30.) 


330 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


I. Christ Opposed by a Religious System. (v. 1.) 
‘“‘When morning was come.” ‘The morning after our Lord’s 
ordeal in Gethsemane. ‘‘All the chief priests and elders.” 
The religious leaders of Jesus’ day were combined. Note 
especially here the use of all. If this group was divided 
on many points of doctrine or polity, it was nevertheless 
united on one point at least. “Took counsel against Jesus.” 
A concerted plan is indicated. This was directed against 
Jesus, their best friend, and only Saviour. “To put him 
to death.” Organized religion rallied to do away with Him 
who was the Founder, the Center and Circumference of 
the only religion which does what a religion promises to do. 
His life was above reproach; His teaching was the highest, 
yet He encountered the entrenched opposition of leaders, 
supposed to provide the best in religion. 

II. Christ Face to Face with the Roman State. (vs. 
2: 11-14.) 

2. “And they bound him.” As though they needed to. 
As if they had a right to. His citizenship rights were dis- 
regarded. His power was not respected. How easily He 
who brake the bands of death, could have rent asunder 
their flimsy cords. Led him away. ‘The Lion of the tribe 
of Judah” was “brought as a lamb to the slaughter” (Isa. 
53:7b). “Delivered him up to Pilate the governor.” (Para- 
didomi) delivered is the same Greek word as is used of 
Judas betraying his Lord. (Luke 22:48.) Judas betrayed 
Him to the Jewish leaders and these “betrayed”? Him to 
the Roman governor whom they forced to have Him cruci- 
fied. 11. “Jesus stood before the governor.’’ He who is 
both Lawgiver and Judge stood as a culprit before this 
Roman official, who proved quite unequal to the occasion. 
One day Pilate will stand before Christ as Judge, and the 
former will be as fairly dealt with as if he had released 
Jesus. Precious confidence made possible by His lofty 
life! “Art thou the King of the Jews?” Edersheim notes in 
Pilate’s question, as in his bearing, a “mixture of contempt, 
cynicism and awe.” Pilate took it for granted that, as the 
Sanhedrists represented, Jesus claimed to be King. John 
18: 33-38 gives the most complete account of what passed 
between Jesus and Pilate here. If Pilate were cynical or 


THE PASSION WEEK 331 


playful at first, Jesus at once brought him to seriousness by 
asking “Sayest thou this of thyself?” Christ tried to get 
Pilate to speak for himself, to be a responsible character. 
Pilate’s answer was, ‘Am Ia Jew?” Thus he would brush 
aside the issue so as not to make it personal. Jesus’ admis- 
sion that He was a King was accompanied by the explan- 
ation, ““My Kingdom is not of this world.” He was no com- 
petitor of Cesar. He was at Pilate’s mercy. His “forces,” 
His “armies,” His “body-guard” were in heaven. No one 
need fear Him. Only foolish men would oppose with force 
Him who did not resort to force. Yet he wasa King. His 
realm was truth. He had come to earth to tell of His king- 
dom. And, sad to relate, the leaders of religion heard not 
His voice and so evidently were not of the truth, to which 
Pilate also was a stranger. 

v. 12. “Accused . . . he answered nothing.”’ He was not 
there to debate with prejudiced priests, but to die for our 
sins. So He conserved His strength for the cruel Cross. 
Thus to its torments He was keenly sensible. 

vy. 13. “Pilate saith unto him, Hearest thou not?” “As He 
stood in the calm silence of His majesty, Pilate greatly 
wondered. Did this man not even fear death... . There was 
that in Christ which, perhaps for the first time in his life, 
had made him reluctant to be unrighteous and unjust.— 
Edersheim. 

v. 14. “He gave him no answer.” Our Saviour carefully 
chose His words when He spoke. He did not always speak. 
With Him truth was paramount. His freedom, or even 
His life, dear to Him as to us, paled into insignificance be- 
side truth. Jesus so spoke that He left no occasion for 
regrets. “The governor marveled greatly.” Pilate had 
never before seen the like. He was perplexed. Eager to 
shift the responsibility of passing judgment on such a char- 
acter, Pilate gladly turned Jesus over to Herod, who was at 
Jerusalem for the feast, as soon as he learned that Jesus 
was from Galilee. 

III. Christ Encounters Roused Public Sentiment. (vs. 
15-26.) 

v. 15. “The governor was wont to release . . . one pris- 
oner, whom they would.” A restless Jewish ‘“‘multitude”’ is 
curious to witness some popular prisoner set free. The 


332 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


crowd determines which one of the prisoners shall be liber- 
ated. 

v. 16. “A notable prisoner Barabbas.” He “belonged to 
that class, not uncommon at the time, which, under the 
colorable pretence of political aspirations, committed robbery 
and other crimes.’ Edersheim asks, “Was he a political 
Anti-Christ?” The fact that he was suggested rather than 
one of the malefactors, who was crucified with Christ, sug- 
gests that each was charged with the same thing in a gen- 
eral way. At least each was a prominent prisoner. But the 
Jews, not altogether unfriendly to those that made trouble 
for Rome’s rulers, naturally favored Barabbas, regardless 
of his real character. 

v. 17. “They were gathered together.” The many Jews 
that had come to the Feast of the Passover. “Whom will 
ye that I release?’ It is quite clear that Christ’s fate was 
in the hands of a mob which was being incited by the 
Jewish leaders to clamor for His life. ‘Barabbas or Jesus.” 
Against the former there were such grave charges; against 
Jesus there was no real ground for a charge as Pilate soon 
discovered, and repeatedly stated. There was no basis for 
comparison, yet they were contrasted. Evidently Pilate 
hoped that Jesus’ superiority of character and conduct would 
vindicate Him, but Jewish prejudice could not be per- 
suaded. 

v. 18. “He knew that for envy they had delivered him 
up.’ Pilate saw He was superior to His accusers. Had they 
given Him fair play, He would easily have carried the 
people with Him at all times, as in fact He usually did. 
Jealousy was the predominating motive which impelled the 
Sanhedrists to engage in propaganda against Jesus as 
Pilate viewed the matter. 

v. 19. “He was sitting on the judgment-seat.” Ready to 
pass a sentence that hurt his conscience. ‘His wife sent 
unto him, saying—” Pilate’s wife evidently had much 
influence over him. Quite likely he had discussed with her 
this Jesus who was known quite generally by this time. 
“Have nothing to do with that righteous man.” Here is 
advice with a vengeance. In her decisive statement she 
makes it clear that her husband should “keep hands off” 


THE PASSION WEEK 333 


Christ and that Jesus is a “righteous man.” Here is a 
case of where a prominent man could have learned of his 
wife. Certainly her message stirred his conscience and at 
least delayed conviction of the Master. “Suffered many 
things. . .in a dream because of him.”’ “An omen such as a 
dream, and an appeal connected with it, especially under 
the circumstances of that trial, would powerfully impress a 
Roman.” —Edersheim. 

v. 20. “Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded the 
multitude.” Did the message of Pilate’s wife seem to turn 
the tide? At least these religious leaders appear to be espe- 
cially energetic in their opposition just at this point, if a 
sequence of events is here listed. Evidently the multitude 
was incited by the Sanhedrists as they wormed in and out 
among the crowd, carrying on their fiendish propaganda 
against Christ. 

v. 21. “But the governor answered. . .? And they said, 
Barabbas.”” As one has written, “In vain Pilate expostulated, 
reasoned, appealed. Popular frenzy only grew as it was 
opposed.” The governor could not carry the crowd. He 
was being carried out by the relentless tide of religious op- 
position. With unabated zeal the enemies of Christ had 
wrought until public sentiment had been aroused against 
Him. 

v. 22. “What then shall I do unto Jesus?” In the A. V. 
we have “with Jesus.” From this question many a sermon 
has been preached. Thus put, it is the question of the age, 
being equivalent to “What think ye of Christ?” Beloved, 
our treatment of Christ marks us. He is the touchstone of 
the race. Our reaction to Him determines our destiny. 
“They all say, Let him be crucified.” In unison they utter 
their fearful verdict. Here we witness the most heartless, 
unaccountable rejection ever recorded on the pages of his- 
tory. The decrees that bade Socrates drink the hemlock 
and Huss die at the stake were not in the same class as this 
cold, calculated, merciless, as well as groundless, decision. 

v. 23. “Why, what evil hath he done?” In vain does the 
Roman governor, with his innate and trained regard for a 
man’s record as manifest in deeds, appeal to that flawless 
life of good works. Not a blot mars the page of that white 


334 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


life. But this avails nothing to save a life, about to be laid 
down for the race. “They cried out exceedingly.” They 
_ do not simply “say” here, but “cry out exceedingly.” They 
seem blood-thirsty. They vent their venom. The stream 
has become a torrent. They say, “Let him be crucified,” 
with all the fervor of their combined passions. They need 
not repeat. Pilate understands that they will have Christ's 
blood. 

v. 24. “Pilate saw.” Their conduct was so unmistakable 
as to its significance that Pilate knew that further efforts to 
stem the tide of their fury would be futile. They had 
“passed the limit.” “He took water and washed his hands 
before the multitude.” As Deuteronomy 21:6 shows, 
Pilate surely knew this was a Jewish rite. He could not 
wash away his own guilt, but by his act he made the guilt 
of the Jews the greater. Certainly Pilate’s conduct, as a 
whole, indicated that Christ had made a deep impression 
upon him. ‘See ye to it.” When Judas returned the money 
paid him for a traitor’s work, the chief priests and elders 
received his confession with the words, “See thou to it.” 
Now these words are hurled back at them. The boomerang 
soon returned. 

v. 25. “And all the people answered.” We read that 
“after the solemn washing of hands of the elders and their 
disclaimer of guilt, priests responded with this prayer : “For- 
give it to Thy people Israel, whom Thou hast redeemed, O 
Lord, and lay not innocent blood upon Thy people Israel!” 
About thirty years later among the 3,600 “victims of the 
Governor’s fury” were many noble citizens of Jerusalem. 
Some were scorned and crucified, near the Pretorium. A 
little later hundreds of Jews were crucified within sight of 
Jerusalem. And yet eternal vengeance is meted on the Jew 
and his children! 

v. 26. “Released . . . Barabbas,” and thus gratified the 
multitude. ‘But Jesus he scourged and delivered to be 
crucified.”” The scourging should have been enough to ap- 
pease the Jews, for it was sufficiently horrible to satisfy the 
most vengeful. “Stripped of his clothes, his hands tied 
and back bent, the victim would be bound to a column or 


THE PASSION WEEK 625 


stake in front of the Prztorium.” ‘Then would be inflicted 
that “intermediate death.” 


IV. Christ Insulted by the Ribald Soldiers (vs. 27-31). 


v. 27. “Then the soldiers . . . took Jesus into the palace.” 
But not to care for His wounds nor to comfort Him. They 
simply made Him the object of their jesting and that in the 
“palace.” “Whole band.” All are called in lest some should 
miss the merrymaking at the expense of the “meek and 
lowly Jesus.” Not one soldier ventured to insist that Jesus 
should be respected. At least the narrative records no 
championing of His cause. 


v. 28. “And they stripped him.” Deprived of His liberty 
and all that life naturally holds dear, Jesus is not even per- 
mitted to be the custodian of His own clothes. Not even 
His personal modesty is regarded. Ruthlessly and roughly 
“they stripped him.” “Put on him a scarlet robe.” The 
only covering He has is of “scarlet,” symbolic of human 
passions. But we rejoice to believe that one day He will 
be arrayed in the royal purple—mixture of the red and 
blue, the heavenly color with which the dome of the skies 
is tinted. 

v.29. “A crown of thorns.” That thorny crown, a re- 
minder of nature’s curse (Genesis 3:18), pricked His 
“Sacred Head.” But we impatiently wait to hear the 
strains, “Bring forth the royal diadem and crown Him 
Lord of all.” “A reed in His right hand.” A mock scepter. 
What is more fragile than a reed? It is so easily “shaken 
by the wind.” But He does and will wield a “scepter of 
righteousness.” Some even now recognize His authority. 
All must do so some time. “They kneeled down before 
Him.” Sportively, mockingly they knelt to affect worship. 
some day these same soldiers will bend the knee to Him 
in reverence or by compulsion, for “every knee shall bow” 
to Him. “Hail, King of the Jews.” Imagine this coming 
from husky throats. The intended irony is evident. Little 
did they think that He will, one day, be recognized by all 
as “King of kings.” Less respect had these Roman soldiers 
for any “king of the Jews.” 

v. 30. “They spat on him.” When men would show 


336 CHRIST AN THE FOUR GOSPELS 
Bo 

utter contempt for a person they eject upon him sputum, an 
excrement of the body. So the pollution of men’s corrupt 
bodies broke upon Him who is worthy of plaudits and 
praise. ‘‘Smote him on the head.” He was subjected to 
the most abusive and taunting treatment. His patience tried, 
proved to be genuine. We bless Him whom they bruised. 


§ 140. The Saviour on the Cross. Mat. 27: 32-56; 
Mark 15:21-41; Luke 23:26-49; Jno. 19: 
16b-37, 


INTRODUCTION : 
Importance of the Cross 


The crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ is the most im- 
portant fact on record. It was the fulfillment of clear 
prophecy. The twenty-second Psalm, though possibly ap- 
plicable to certain of David’s experiences, is prophetic of 
the sufferings of our Saviour on the Cross. Isaiah 53 could 
not refer to any other than Christ. There we see depicted 
the sufferings of the ideal Servant of Jehovah, and we quote 
“He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised 
for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon 
him; and with his stripes we are healed . . . the Lord hath 
laid on him the iniquity of us all . . . and he made his 
grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death.” Not 
only by expressed prophecy, but by type and symbol, the 
crucifixion of Christ was predicted by the writers of the 
Old Testament Scripture. So the dying of “Jesus of Naz- 
areth, the King of the Jews” on the Cross of Golgotha was 
the fulfillment of prophecy as well as the focal point of his- 
tory, for just as all before points to the Cross, so all of 
revealed religion since that time points back to “the old 
rugged Cross.’”’ Then we shall think of the crucifixion of 
our Lord as the finality in religion. This is the last word 
in divine love and sacrifice. While the birth and life of 
Christ meant “God with us,” Emmanuel, His death meant 
“God instead of us.” 


The Victim, Christ 


Before meditating upon the Saviour on the Cross, let us 
consider His physical unfitness for the ordeal of crucifixion; 


THE PASSION WEEK 337 


His spiritual vigor in spite of His weakened condition; and 
then just what crucifixion was. We recall that Christ had 
not partaken of food since the Passover Feast. He had on 
the occasion of the Last Supper anticipated the betrayal; 
had seen Judas go forth into the darkness alone; had led 
forth His disciples to the Garden of Gethsemane; and had 
fought the battle in loneliness while great drops of blood 
oozed out of His pores; had been betrayed by the kiss of 
one whom He called a “‘friend’’; had been taken before 
Annas, Caiaphas, Pilate, Herod, and Pilate again; had been 
abused and even scourged, and then had attempted to bear 
His own Cross, only to be relieved by the unwilling Simon 
of Cyrene. So naturally He came to the most excruciating 
type of death exhausted physically. 


The Vigor of Christ 


Yet we marvel at the spiritual vigor which He displayed, 
for as Luke records, while He was bearing the Cross the 
women bewailed and lamented Him, but instead of accepting 
their commiseration He bade them “weep not for me, but 
weep for yourselves and for your children” (Luke 23:28). 
Even in His humiliation and physical weakness He had time 
to foresee with pangs of heart the fact that the people whom 
He loved, who were sending Him to the Cross, would ere 
long be subjected to treatment of the same kind as He was 
receiving. 

Crucifixion 


Crucifixion is of all deaths the most horrible, and possibly 
the most painful: The Jews did not practice crucifixion; 
the Romans seem to have gotten it through the Phcenicians. 
The Crucifixion was after this manner. The upright piece 
was firmly set in the ground, and the victim was then with 
extended arms tied to the cross-piece, to which his hands 
were spiked. Then by means of ladders and ropes he was 
raised to a position so that his feet would be about a foot 
from the ground. The cross-bar was then either tied or 
nailed to the upright. Then the torturing rest was placed 
beneath him, and his feet were stretched down and either 
Keres through with one long nail or each separately nailed 


338 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


to the Cross. Thus the unfortunate victim would hang 
until death would come as a tardy relief. The heart of many 
a hardened sinner has been broken in contemplating that 
the Saviour went through this ordeal. It is our object in 
this lesson to gaze on the sublime scene of Calvary. Let us 
together in the words of Isaiah 42:1, “Behold the Lord’s 
Servant.” It is not our purpose to misplace our emphasis 
and be lost in a shallow sentimentalism as we see only the 
physical suffering of Christ, but we shall look through that 
and beyond to the realities back of and manifest through 
the Crucified Christ. 


I. His Human Relations Fully Met. Luke 23: 33-43; 
John 19: 25-27. 


(1) He forgave His crucifiers (vs. 33,34). “Father 
forgive them, for they. know not what they do.” 
v. 33. “The Skull.” The likelihood is that Golgatha was 
shaped as a human skull, rather than that skulls were scat- 
tered over it. “They crucified him.’ As described above. 
“The malefactors.” The two wicked men of whom we 
shall have more to say later. 
v. 34. “Father, forgive them.” F. W. Robertson points 
out that two things are implied in this prayer: 


(a) Sin needs forgiveness; 
(b) Forgiveness can be granted. 


Sin must be forgiven or a penalty, possibly in the form of 
retribution, will follow. And then if sin is not forgiven, the 
conscience will continue to smite. But on the Cross Christ 
wrought out forgiveness for us, so that none need be 
weighed down by the burden of guilt. “They know not 
what they do.’”’ Christ's desire was that all who participated 
in His crucifixion ignorantly should be forgiven. For us 
to recall that He was suffering the agonies incident to that 
type of death, makes it all the more marvelous that He 
could pray for those who were torturing Him. To do so 
was sublime. 


(2) He is silent at their scoffing and mocking (vs. 
35-38). The fact that Christ said nothing here 
is most expressive of His character. 


THE PASSION WEEK 339 


v.35. “The people stood beholding, and the rulers also 
scoffed at him.” The likelihood is that the rulers . . 
that is, the religious leaders of the Jews . . . had gone to 
the Feast, but upon hearing that Pilate had placed over Him 
the title, “The King of the Jews,” they hastened to the 
scene, lest the Crucifixion of Christ would react upon them. 
They well knew that the multitudes passing to and from the 
Feast would look with wonder upon the gory scene, and 
recount the good deeds of Him whom they had crucified. 
And so they scattered themselves among the crowd to incite 
the scoffing. “He saved others.” Here they spake truly, 
and by His remaining on the Cross He was saving the lost. 
“Let him save himself.” Had Christ replied in power to 
this challenge, and come down from the cross, we would 
not today be enjoying salvation through grace. 

v. 36. “The soldiers also mocked him, coming to him and 
offering him vinegar.”’ Edersheim is of the opinion that 
this offering of vinegar was an act of mercy on the part 
of the soldiery, inasmuch as this vinegar, or sour wine, was 
given to lessen the pain, but that the soldiers participated in 
the mocking because of the spirit engendered by the Jewish 
rulers. 

v. 37. “The King of the Jews.” This utterance by the 
Roman soldiers was as much a slur to the Jews as it was to 
Christ. In it there is bitter irony. 

v. 38. “A superscription.” It is to be observed that the 
Four Gospels vary this superscription. A number of satis- 
factory explanations can be given for this. One is that 
Matthew gives the Latin, Mark the Greek, and John the 
Aramaion or Hebrew superscription. Then as Sidney Col- 
lett holds, “A perfect and full view of Christ and His teach- 
ing can only be obtained by taking the four accounts to- 
gether, so here it is the combined accounts that give us the 
total sum of the wording of the superscription as written 
in the three languages.”’ The main part of the superscrip- 
tion was “The King of the Jews,” and each of the Four 
Gospels give us this. Probably the full superscription was, 
“This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” 


(3) He promised Paradise to the penitent thief (vs. 
39-43). 


340 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


v. 39. “One . . . railed on him.” This malefactor did 
what malefactors ordinarily did. He simply gave vent to 
his ill disposition, as aggravated by the suffering and abuse 
of the cross. 

v.40. “But the other answered and rebuking him said.” 
In striking contrast to the former is the latter. To him 
the scene was an occasion to “fear God.” 


v. 41. “We indeed justly . . . but this man has done 
nothing amiss.” In this statement we see a confession of 
sin and an expression of faith in Christ. The awful fact of 
Christ crucified had gripped the heart and mind of this sin- 
ful man, and had lifted him into the realm of faith. 


v.42. “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy 
kingdom.” Christ’s conduct on the Cross had at least won 
this man to Him. We here contemplate the influence of 
Christ. So far as the record goes, the Lord Jesus did not 
attempt to do personal work with His fellow-sufferers, but 
He did, by His blameless conduct, win this malefactor to 
Himself and to faith in His coming kingdom. But He did 
not win the other. 

v.43. “Verily I say unto thee.” The Lord Jesus re- 
sponded to the faith of the needy one even though His body 
was racked with agony. 


(4) He provides for His mother (John 19: 25-27). 
“‘Woman behold thy son.” “Behold thy mother.” 


With Christ the amenities of life were not forgotten, even 
though He was in the tortures of this most excruciating of 
deaths. He provided for His mother and manifested fidel- 
ity to His faithful friend John. As we read the parallel 
accounts and note what John has omitted, we infer that he 
had left the crucifixion scene and had gone to bring the 
mother of our Lord to the scene of the crucifixion. When 
Jesus saw her, He took thought for her and committed her 
to John in the loving words quoted above. And the narra- 
tive reads, ‘From that hour the disciple took her unto his 
own home.” Evidently, John at once took her from the 
gory scene, for certainly the arrow had pierced her heart. 
Can we imagine that Christ could have conducted Himself 
so, if love had not been reigning in His life? 


THE PASSION WEEK 341 


II. His “Work” “Finished” (Luke 23:44, 45). 


(1) He senses the separation from God and the suf- 
fering from thirst. Above we have considered 
His response to the welfare of others. It is 
characteristic of Him that consideration for 
others preceded that for Himself. Now we 
note His own feelings and His final dealings on 
the Cross with His Heavenly Father. “My God, 
my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” 

v. 44, “About the sixth hour, and there was darkness over 
all the earth until the ninth hour.” As darkness enveloped 
the earth, so the human soul of Christ was thrown into the 
darkness of despair. That was the hour when the Prince 
of the power of the air with his hosts of demons obscured 
the sun from the suffering Saviour. 

v. 45. “The sun’s light failing.” This was the time when 
Jesus uttered “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken 
me?’ He felt as though He were alone, for “He was 
touched with the feeling of our infirmities.” Then again, 
“Sin had hidden his consciousness of God.” For did He 
not die unto sin once, and although He was not suffering 
for His own sin, yet inasmuch as He was bearing the sins 
of the world, is it not likely that this cloud of sin would dim 
His vision and cause Him to feel and fear that He was 
separated from God? For it has always been that sin causes 
the soul to feel that God is far off, if not entirely unap- 
proachable. Soon, as John records, He uttered, “I thirst.” 
As Edersheim suggests, He must have felt His physical 
energies waning as He approached death, and was eager to 
be revived, that He might with strength lay down His life. 
So though He had refused to take the vinegar that would 
have served as an anesthetic before, yet now He drinks it as 
it was handed to Him in a sponge on hyssop. This revived 
Him evidently, and enabled Him to speak, as Mark says, 
with a “loud voice’ as He gave up the Ghost. “The Veil 
of the Temple was rent.”” Though so strong that it could 
hardly be rent, yet as Jesus died the new and living Way was 
opened up into the Holy of Holies, and the veil that sep- 
arated the Holy Place from the Holiest of all was divided, 
so that every Christian can now go into the very presence 


of the Lord. 


342 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


(2) He commends His spirit to His Father (Luke 
23:46). “Father, into thy hands I commend 
my spirit.” “It is finished” (John 19:30). 
“Father, into thy hands.” When His soul was 
darkness He had said “My God,” but now being 
quickly revived He says, “Father,” as though 
just for a little He had lost the sense of God 
being His Father. “Into Thy Hands.” These 
words expressed His confidence in His Father, 
as though He were starting over a strange way. 
These words have been used by many a dying 
saint: Polycarp, Bernard, Huss, Luther and 
Melanchthon, all uttered these words. 


His final words, “It is finished,” are freighted with mean- 
ing. So these utterances of Christ indicate to us His re- 
sponse when there was enacted the most important scene of 
human history. 


§141. The Burial. Mat. 27:57-61; Mark 15: 42-47; 
Luke 23: 50-56a; John 19: 38-42. | 


Our Lord’s sacrificial death was accompanied by mar- 
velous significant phenomena. ‘The rent veil of the temple, 
suggesting the ushering in of a spiritual priesthood (1 Pet. 
2:9), may have been the result of the same physical force 
which caused the earth to quake and the rocks to rend. 

These unusual happenings, together with the opening of 
tombs and the raising of the dead, following the three hours 
of mid-day darkness, provoked the centurion and his asso- 
ciates to fear exceedingly and to say, “Truly this was the 
Son of God.” 

Ordinarily the unimaginably painful death of the crucified 
came at the end of two or three days of most excruciating 
torture. And since Jesus was crucified on Friday, it seemed 
evident to the Jews that He would not die before their 
“high Sabbath.” So they asked of Pilate that the legs of 
Jesus and the malefactors might be broken in order to 
hasten their death, but certainly not to lessen the full meas- 
ure of their suffering. “The breaking of the bones was a sort 
of increase of punishment, by way of compensation for its 


THE PASSION WEEK 343 


shortening by the final stroke that followed.”—Edershewn. 
“The soldiers therefore came and brake the legs” of the 
two malefactors “in keeping with Roman cruelty.” But 
Jesus had died before this added and accumulated brutality 
could be inflicted upon Him. But one of the soldiers, eager 
to be sure of His death or to give vent to a degenerate mor- 
bidity “pierced his side and straightway there came out 
blood and water.” This John must have witnessed (John 
19 : 35-37). 

Geikie is a strong advocate of the opinion that Jesus died 
of heart rupture. We quote: “That any one should die so 
soon on the cross, especially one, like Jesus, in the prime of 
life, and unweakened by previous ill-health, and in such 
vigor to the last as to utter such a shriek as that with which 
He expired, appeared even to Christian antiquity to imply 
some supernatural cause. But the mingled flow of blood and 
water seems to point unmistakably to another explanation. 
The immediate cause of death appears, beyond question, to 
have been the rupture of His heart, brought about by mental 
agony. Excess of joy or grief is known to induce the burst- 
ing of some division of the heart, and the consequent flow 
of blood into the pericardium, or bag, filled with colorless 
serum, like water, in which the heart is suspended.” ‘The 
thrust of the soldier’s spear permitted the discharge of both 
fluids. Jesus’ “shriek” (Mat. 27:50; Mark 15:37) is ex- 
plained by the fact that heart rupture is accompanied by a 
loud cry. | 

Those mentioned in connection with Jesus’ burial are two 
influential men, either of whom might have manifested more 
courage during His life, and two devoted women, whose 
loving constancy surpasses that of even the apostles. 

Joseph of Arimathea is described as “rich” (Mat. 27: 
57), “a councillor” (Mark 15:43; Luke 23:50), “a good 
and righteous man” (Luke 23:50), “a disciple” (John 19: 
38). Though he held his discipleship “secretly for fear of 
the Jews,” yet he “went boldly to Pilate” and asked for the 
body of Jesus (Mark 15:43). The crucifixion scene must 
have given him boldness, or else his riches stood him in good 
stead. For records of a Roman governor accepting bribe 
money exist. However this may be the Greek form of 


344 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“asked’”’ (the middle voice is used) indicates that Joseph was 
importunate. His was no formal request, but rather a fer- 
vent pleading. His new tomb was suitable for Him whose 
life was in so many respects unprecedented. His birth was 
unique, “of a virgin” and “laid in a manger.” Ordinarily 
one crucified was disposed of in the valley of Hinnon, but 
Joseph gave Jesus a burial more nearly fitting to His sacred 
bod 

Then Nicodemus “who at first came to him by night” 
came “bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes about a hun- 
dred pound weight.”’ The body of Jesus was tenderly re- 
leased from the cruel cross, sanctified by its holy victim, 
then it was washed and “bound in linen cloths with the 
spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury.” Finally, with 
due dignity and painstaking care Joseph and Nicodemus 
accomplished the last act of love for, and pressed the last kiss 
upon Him from whom they had learned while He lived. 
Nor did those divine lips, pale in death, miraculously open 
to chide either for any timidity of the past. God, in His 
abundant mercy, permitted Joseph and Nicodemus, by these 
loving ministrations, to atone for any previous languor or 
cowardice. Did He not arrange it that woman, who first ate 
of the forbidden fruit, should “be saved by her child-bear- 
ing’? ‘The serpent beguiled’’ Eve, nevertheless she was 
“the mother of all living.’”’ Was not, therefore, the Messiah 
her descendant on the human side? —Thus God’s mercy ever 
“seasons” His justice. 

Appropriate indeed it was that Mary Magdalene, and 
Mary the mother of Joses, should follow after and behold 
the tomb and satisfy themselves and their sisters that their 
Master had proper burial and so was ‘“‘At Rest.” Luke, with 
characteristic human touch, notes that “they returned and 
prepared spices, and ointments’; their returning with these 
enabled them to first learn of the empty tomb and meet the 
risen Saviour. 


§ 142. The Watch at the Sepulchre. Mat. 27: 62-66. 


Imagine, if you can, what thoughts filled the minds of 
men after Jesus had been placed in the new tomb of Joseph | 
of Arimathea. As I write this (July 29, 1925, 9:30 p.m.), 


THE PASSION WEEK 345 


I recall that only four hours ago the body of William Jen- 
nings Bryan was laid to rest yonder in the National Ceme- 
tery at Arlington. In a most eloquent, eulogistic funeral 
oration (heard over the radio), Rev. Sizoo of the New York 
Avenue Presbyterian Church (the church attended by ten 
of our Presidents, including Lincoln) recounted the nobility 
of his life, his faith, etc. He referred to “‘friends and foes.” 
From the daily press we know what they are saying of the 
Great Commoner. We observe that his critics are cautious 
and considerate. They refer to him with kindness, even 
appreciation. He has championed his last “cause.” His 
crusade for the faith of the boys and girls of Tennessee 
marked his last battle. He sleeps. None need fear his per- 
son now. 

Why were the chief priests and Pharisees not minded 
to let Jesus thus rest? Ah! they recalled His words, “After 
three days I rise again.” If His own disciples had for- 
gotten this prediction, these enemies had not. So they 
troubled Pilate to make “the sepulchre sure until the third 
day.” Their expressed fear was that His disciples would 
steal His body and proclaim His resurrection. Pilate, likely 
impatient about it all, probably still washing his hands, 
granted them their request. So the grave was sealed and a 
guard was stationed. ‘Thus the enemies of Jesus played 
into God’s hands and made the resurrection proofs indis- 
putable. 

We can only attempt to picture the disappointed Peter, 
James, John, Nicodemus, Joseph, and the rest, possibly 
huddled together as sheep, deprived of their Shepherd and 
fearing the same hungry wolves that had fallen upon Him. 
Their faith was likely not even a dim hope. 


ii ei 
ie ba 
ba oh 





PART IX 
The Forty Days 


Dek atc ihe PE 
‘s ta , ’ 
_ ‘ 
[ie 
ak 
} 
a", 
‘ os 
mn vt Y 





est VAD, 
A ti A ay 









i 
A a 


ry 


THE FORTY DAYS 


§ 143. The Resurrection Morning. Mat. 28: 1-10; Mark 
16: 1-8, 9-11; Luke 23: 56b-24:12; John 20: 
1-18. 


INTRODUCTION: 


The Resurrection of our Saviour has been called “the 
master miracle of the ages.’”’ It is true that nature never 
of her own accord returns those who have died. Hence, it 
was a supernatural power that brought our Lord from the 
grave. When it is admitted that Christ rose from the 
dead, then it is easy to believe the Virgin Birth or any other 
miraculous feature of the life of Christ. Our introduction 
will include the answer to certain arguments made against 
the resurrection. 

1. It has been stated that the Gospel narratives do not 
agree in their respective accounts of the resurrection. To 
this we would reply that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John 
were not intending to furnish the whole history of the resur- 
rection, but only to give evidences of it. Only one writer 
was an eye-witness. The others wrote from different points 
of view, making prominent certain particulars. 

2. Christ’s body was said to be stolen by the disciples. 
To this we reply that the disciples’ characters are a success- 
ful refutation of this argument. Then again, these dis- 
ciples died for the preaching of the resurrection and kindred 
truth. They surely would not have died for that which 
they knew was unfounded. Again it is quite clear that the 
disciples never expected that Jesus would rise, and so would 
have no object in making it appear that He rose. The fact 
that they did not believe that He would rise is gathered 
from their providing spices for His body, the perplexity of 
the apostles as shown in Luke 24:19-24, and the plain 
statement of the Scriptures, John 20: 9, 

3. Some have insisted that the body of Christ was stolen 
by enemies. Had this been so, the enemies would have 

349 


350 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


silenced Peter and others when they preached the Resurrec- 
tion. They would have simply produced the body. 

4. It has been feebly held that Christ was not really dead. 
This opinion makes Christ an imposter. According to this, 
how could we account for the fact that Christ walked to 
Emmaus with pierced feet? We recall here that the post- 
resurrection body was different in some respects from the 
body before crucifixion. That there was an identity is clear 
from the fact that His body was recognized after the resur- 
rection. 

5. Some have held that those who saw Him were mis- 
taken, that they were the victims of nervous imaginations 
or reflection. ‘To this we reply that the nervous imaginative 
state referred to does not come on unless the person has 
been thinking along the lines of the imaginings. As John 
20:9 records, the disciples were not contemplating His 
resurrection. 

6. The authenticity of the Gospel accounts has been at- 
tacked as being fictitious. We ask here why the disciples 
should have fabricated a history of something which they 
did not believe would occur. Then, if they had forged these 
accounts, they would have been identical in every particular 
from collusion, but as it is, they are sufficiently different to 
indicate that they had been separately written. 

Having answered these arguments briefly, we maintain 
that the fact of the Resurrection of our Lord is historically 
established. The Apostle Paul probed into the subject, and 
in 1 Corinthians 15 cites between 500 and 600 witnesses 
whose characters are beyond question. 


EXPOSITION OF JoHN 20: 1-18 


I. Mary Magdalene at the Tomb (v. 1). 


v. 1. “On the first day of the week.’”’ In the early morn- 
ing ‘while it was yet dark.” As soon as the Jewish Sab- 
bath had ended Mary and other women hurried off with 
their spices to preserve the body of Him whom they loved. 
“Mary Magdalene.” Ejidersheim records that it is at least 
a curious coincidence that the relatives and friends of the 
deceased were in the habit of going to the grave up to the 
third day, so as to make sure that those laid there were really 


THE FORTY DAYS 351 


dead. Jesus had liberated Mary Magdalene, and she had 
given Him such care during His life that she naturally felt 
the more keenly the loss in His death. “The stone.’ The 
stone was rolled away by an angel of the Lord who had 
descended from Heaven. Doubtless the Master in His 
resurrection body needed not to have the stone rolled away, 
but had it been left there and the tomb empty, it might have 
implied what was no longer true. So we can fancy the 
surprise of the women as they saw the dark open entrance, 
instead of the stone. 


II. Her report to Peter and John. 


v. 2. “She runneth and cometh to Simon Peter.”’ Mary, 
greatly excited, evidently hastened to the chief apostles with 
her startling news. Apparently Peter and John lived at dif- 
ferent places. “They have taken away the Lord out of the 
tomb.” This statement indicates that Mary at this time 
did not know that the Lord had risen, but supposed that His 
body had been removed. “We know not where they have 
laid him.” The plural “we” indicates that Mary was not 
alone at this time. Her statement clearly shows that she 
had no expectation that He would arise. Hence her state 
of mind was not that of joy, but rather of grief. 


III. Peter and John go to the Tomb (vs. 3-9). 


v. 3. “Peter therefore went forth.” It was Mary’s mes- 
sage that started the men toward the tomb. We note here 
that the women were more active than the men, and that 
the latter’s lethargy was disturbed by Mary’s message. It 
is interesting that Peter and John, who had been the closest 
to the Master, were the first of the disciples to approach the 
tomb. 


v.4. “They ran both together.” What thoughts must 
have filled their minds! ‘The other disciple outran Peter.” 
John was younger and likely more active than Peter. We 
can hardly imagine that his fleetness was due to a greater 
love. 

v. 5. “And stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen 
clothes lying.” John was curious, and so peered into the 
sepulchre to first discover the startling fact that Christ was 


352 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


no longer wrapped in-linen clothes. ‘Yet entered he not 
in.” John’s hesitancy was likely due to awe and reverence. 

v.6. “Simon Peter . . . entered the tomb.” Naturally 
bolder than John, Peter would be more likely to rush in to 
the sacred sepulchre than his more sensitive companion. In 
this race to the tomb, and subsequent entrance, we have a 
fine character display of Peter and John. “He beholdeth 
the linen clothes lying.” The Greek word here is “theoreo,” 
which indicates that he steadfastly gazed upon the sight. 

v.7. “The napkin . . . not lying with the linen clothes, 
but rolled up.” The Master had left the tomb not with 
haste, but after leaving things in good order. 


v. 8. “The other disciple . . . saw and believed.’”’ What- 
ever had been John’s thoughts as he ran toward the tomb or 
after Mary Magdalene had borne him the news of its 
emptiness, it seems quite clear that he had not come to the 
point of faith until he had himself seen the tomb. Then he 
believed. Surely he here believed that the Lord had risen. 
It is as though, being near the Master, he had remembered 
His words and now comprehended their meaning. 


v.9. “As yet they knew not the Scripture that he must 
rise from the dead.” John as well as Peter and the other 
disciples had not comprehended what Jesus had taught rela- 
tive to His Resurrection. It was only after they had gone 
into the empty tomb that they began to wonder and maybe 
believe in the possibility of His resurrection. He had either 
risen or He had been taken from the tomb. ‘There were 
only two alternatives. 


IV. Mary at the Tomb (vs. 10-17). 


v. 10. “The disciples went away.” Peter and John could 
do nothing better than go home. Probably they did not 
want to attract attention to the empty tomb until they had 
located their Master. Likely they went to seek the other 
apostles and talk over the wonderful happenings. 

v. 11. “But Mary was standing without at the tomb weep- 
ing.” She knew only the empty tomb, and this was poor 
consolation to her heart. She could not bear to leave, and 
probably she was too grief-stricken to withdraw at this time. 
“As she wept she stooped and looked into the tomb.” Wip- 


THE FORTY DAYS 353 


ing her tears she ventures one glance into the empty tomb. 
Just as many a grief-stricken one has in vain sought relief 
from sorrow at a bier or some familiar spot. 

v.12. “She beholdeth two angels.” The original Greek 
indicates that by steadfastly gazing she saw there two angels, 
in white, one at the head and one at the feet, thus 
marking the place where the Lord had lain. 

v. 13. “Woman, why weepest thou?” ‘This question was 
not simply an inquiry but was intended to arouse Mary to 
the futility of her tears. Possibly the angels intended it as 
comfort. “Because they have taken away my Lord, and | 
know not where they have laid him,” Mary seems to be 
alone at this time, for no longer does she use the plural “we,” 
but the singular “I.” She is the most faithful, if not the 
most grief-stricken mourner, and in isolation sobs out her 
sorrow. 

v. 14. “She turneth herself and beholdeth Jesus standing 
and knew not that it was Jesus.’ ‘There must have been 
something in His resurrected body which was different from 
His body before His crucifixion, else Mary would have 
known Him. Her not recognizing Him could hardly be 
explained by the fact that she was grief-stricken. Certainly 
His deity must have shown forth from His celestial body 
as it never could have done in His terrestrial body. 

y. 15. “Woman, why weepest thou?” This question had 
_ been asked her before by the angels, but this time it comes 
from lips that had pronounced blessings and given instruc- 
tions to her on many occasions before. “Supposing him to 
be the gardener.” ‘These words make it clear that she had 
no intimation that she was talking with the risen Lord. She 
fancied that she was addressing a servant of Joseph of 
Arimathea, and of course that he would be friendly to her. 
And who but the gardener would be likely to be there so 
early? “If thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou 
hast laid him, and I will take him away.” One writer states 
that she thought that they were unwilling to have the honor- 
able sepulchre used by him longer, and that possibly they 
had thrown him into the shameful common grave used for 
men stoned and crucified. Mary would have been glad to 
recover the body and give it a permanent grave. 

23 


354 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


v. 16. “Jesus saith unto her, Mary.” ‘Though she had not 
recognized Him up to this time, when after a moment’s 
pause ‘He spake her name in those well-remembered ac- 
cents that had first unbound her from seven-fold demonized 
power, and called her into a new life,” she recognized Him. 

‘“Rabboni, which is to say, Master.” Rabboni is probably 
Galilean, and by this term she had customarily addressed the 
Lord. 

v.17. “Touch me not.” As Matthew 28:9 records, Mary 
probably had taken hold of His feet, as though to be sure 
that He was not a phantom, and while so doing would recog- 
nize the nail prints as she worshipped Him. But Jesus was 
not ready for the touch of love and worship, for He had 
not yet ascended to His Father. He had something more 
important for Mary to do at this time, even than to revere 
Him. “Go unto my brethren.” ‘The Master was eager that 
His disciples know that He was risen. And so He sent her 
forth to them with the glad news. 


V. Mary tells the Disciples. 


v. 18. “Mary Magdalene cometh and telleth the disciples.” 
Mary was not simply a devoted worshipper and a loving 
friend, but a faithful servant, and so with quick step she 
hastened to tell the disciples, not simply that the tomb was 
empty, but the greater marvel that she had communed with 
the risen Lord. Since that day a host of ambassadors have 
gone forth to tell of the fact of the risen Lord. “J have 
seen the Lord.’ She spoke with an assurance born out of 
experience. No one could persuade her that she had been 
deceived, for not only had she heard Him say, “Mary,” 
but she had actually touched Him and been commanded by 
Him as of old to carry out His wishes. 


§ 144. The Report of the Watch. Mat. 28: 11-15. 


After Mary Magdalene had told the disciples that she had 
seen the Lord, then some of the guard came to the city and 
made known to the chief priests what had happened. After 
they had taken counsel with the elders they gave to the 
soldiers large sums of money, instructing them to say, “His 
disciples came by night and stole him away while we slept.” 





THE FORTY DAYS 355 


It is quite clear that when the Jewish leaders did this, they 

made the soldiers liable to death, because had this occurred, 

it would have been a case of neglect of duty on the part of 

the watch. But the chief priests and elders assured the 

soldiers that if they would only make this false statement, 

they would see to it that the governor would clear them. 

So the soldiers took the money and did as they were asked, 

and hence there went abroad the saying among the Jews 

that the body of Jesus was stolen from the tomb while the 

soldiers slept. But though the Jews have been deluded with 

this falsehood down through the centuries, the Church has 

ample proof that Christ really has risen from the grave. 

Peloubet shows by a well-arranged chart with Scripture 

citations, that Christ appeared eleven times after His resur- 

rection : 

. To Mary Magdalene. Mark 6:9; John 20: 11-18. 

. To the women returning from the sepulchre. Mat. 
Zor oad: 

. To Simon Peter alone. Luke 24: 34. 

. To two disciples going to Emmaus. Luke 24: 13-31. 

. To the apostles excepting Thomas. John 20: 19-25. 

. To the apostles, Thomas being present. John 20: 
26-29, 

. To the seven disciples fishing. John 21: 1-13. 

. To the eleven disciples on a mountain. Mat. 28: 
16-18. 

9. To 500 brethren. 1 Cor. 15:6. 

10. To James only. 1 Cor. 15:7. 

11. To all the apostles at the Ascension. Luke 24:50, 51. 


These different appearings covered the period of time 
from Sunday, April 9th, early in the morning, until Thurs- 
day, May the 18th, and they were near the sepulchre and 
Jerusalem, in Galilee, and on the Mount of Olives. 


§ 145. The Walk to Emmaus. Mark 16:12, 13; Luke 
24: 13-35. 


In the immediate context of our Scripture lesson, Luke 
records how that Jesus met the two disciples between Jeru- 
salem and Emmaus, and how that finding them disconsolate 


COON] OV tn B tt) — 


/ 


356 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


and disappointed because Jesus had been crucified, He re- 
proved them for their slowness of heart to believe all that 
the prophets had spoken. Then beginning from Moses and 
from all the prophets, He explained to them from the 
Scriptures the things concerning Himself. He abode with 
them, sitting down with them to meat and breaking and 
blessing bread. Then when they knew Him, He vanished 
out of their sight. Then they commented as to how their 
hearts had been strangely warmed as they had communed 
with Him on the way. Then they hastened off to Jerusalem 
to tell the eleven of the wonderful experiences they had had 
with the risen Lord. 

From this narrative we glean that if we would understand 
the things of our Lord, it is not enough for us to simply be 
attached to Him and be grief-stricken at what might seem 
to be His loss, neither is it sufficient that we know the Scrip- 
tures that speak of Him. But our eyes must be opened in 
order that we might understand the meaning of these in- 
spired words. Then we see here also, that just as these two 
disciples did not come to recognize Him until they had 
caused Him to accept their hospitality, so we will never 
understand Him until we have welcomed Him and com- 
muned with Him as they did, in the breaking of bread. 


§ 146. The Appearance to the Disciples in Jerusalem, 
Thomas Being Absent. Mark 16:14; Luke 
24: 36-43; John 20: 19-25. 


Luke 24:36. “As they spake these things.” The two 
whom He met on the way to Emmaus are referred to, one 
of whom was possibly Luke. “Jesus himself stood in the 
midst of them.’”’ Since the doors were shut for fear of the 
Jews (John 20:20) His appearing would naturally be 
mysterious to them. 

This raises the question as to what kind of a body Jesus 
had subsequent to His resurrection. ‘Three views are held: 

First: That He had the same glorified body as He had 
after His ascension, and the same as our spiritual bodies 
will be after our resurrection. 1 Cor. 15: 42-53 and Rev. 
1: 13-16 would seem to contradict this view. This would 


NN  eeeeeeeeOeEOEOeeeeeeoeeeeeeee —— 


THE FORTY DAYS 357 


hardly be possible, in view of the fact that He ate after His 
resurrection and before His ascension. 

Second: That He had a body of the same substance as 
that before the crucifixion, but having new properties and 
powers. This view might mar the proof of His resurrec- 
tion. True it is that Jesus’ body was invisible and could be 
transported easily after His resurrection, but these new 
powers could easily be attributed to the power of Jesus’ 
spirit over His body. 

Third: That Jesus had a body of the same substance and 
attributes as that before His crucifixion, and this body was 
changed into the glorious body at the Ascension. ‘This latter 
view seems the more likely. 

“Peace be unto you.” Jesus so addressed them that they 
might not be terrified at His presence. Doubtless they 
needed His salutation of peace at this time. The fear of the 
Jews was so upon them that their door was constantly 
fastened. ‘Then, their Friend and Teacher had been taken 
from them. What a peace must have come to them when 
they realized His presence in their very midst. 

v. 37. “But they were terrified,” etc. The mysterious 
power manifested in their midst naturally terrified them. 
That the disciples were convinced that Jesus had risen, even 
though His first appearance frightened them, it is easy for 
us to believe. The risen Christ did not meet credulous 
friends, eager to accept rumors of His resurrection, but He 
met real men who were normally affected by His surprising 
them on this occasion. And so He convinced them, even 
against their wills and anticipations. 

v.38. “Why do thoughts arise in your hearts?” 
“Thoughts” were references to questionings or anxious 
reasonings. Jesus doubtless referred to their hesitancy to 
believe. Surely they remembered some of His Words 
spoken previous to His death, and they were turning them 
over in their minds, and hence “He upbraided them for 
their unbelief.’ Jesus intimated that they should have been 
looking for Him, instead of being huddled together with 
doors bolted and fearful hearts. 

v. 39. “Behold my hands and my feet.’”’ ‘The marks of 
the nails were there to be seen. Christ will demonstrate to 


358 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


them, since they will not believe Him. “Handle me and 
see.” He did not ask them simply to trust their sight, but 
He bade them touch Him and thus be doubly convinced. 
“A spirit hath not flesh and bones.” ‘They evidently im- 
agined that He was a spectre, but by appealing to three 
senses—sight, touch and hearing—Jesus reassured them that 
He was more than spirit. Incidentally we note that Jesus 
here stated that a spirit has independent existence. 


v.41. “While they yet believed not for joy.” ‘This is as 
we say “‘too good to be true.”’ “Have ye any meat?” Havy- 
ing let them hear Him and see Him, as well as touch Him, 
Jesus would now convince them that He was the same Jesus 
with the same body that they had known, by partaking of 
food in their presence. 


v. 42. “A piece of broiled fish.” Likely a small piece of 
fish was left after the evening meal, and this Jesus ate be- 
fore them. Ina later appearing to the seven fishing (John 
21: 1-13), Jesus again ate fish. 

The early Christians regarded the fish as a mystic symbol 
of the Christ. The five Greek letters that spelled the word 
(i, ch, th, u, s) being the initials for Jesus Christ, God’s 
Son, Saviour. The Roman Catholic custom of eating fish 
only on their fast day is likely connected with this early 
Christian notion. 


§ 147. The Appearance to Thomas With the Other 
Disciples. John 20: 26-29. 


One week before this, Jesus had appeared to His disciples, 
Thomas being absent. Now again, “After eight days”... 
“Tesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, 
and said, Peace be unto you.” When the fellow-disciples of 
Thomas had reported to him the first appearing of Jesus to 
them, he had been sceptical. He had demanded sensuous 
evidence of the risen Christ (Jno. 20:25). 

Therefore, when Jesus appeared “into the midst,’ He 
challenged Thomas to ‘‘Reach hither thy finger, and see my 
hands; and reach thy hand, and put it into my side, and 
be not faithless, but believing.” Thomas had emphasized 
his doubts in strong terms: “Except I see . . . I will not 


THE FORTY DAYS 359 


believe, never.” Jesus challenges his sense of fairness, 
offers to demonstrate to him. Said He, “Reach hither... 
and become not apistos but pistos.” ‘“Unbelieving” and “‘be- 
lieving”’ corerspond to “apistos’ and “pistos.’ The two 
words suggest antitheses. Jesus gave Thomas opportunity 
to line up with the “sons of Abraham.” And Thomas em- 
braced the opportunity. There is no evidence that he did 
reach to touch the wounds of the Master. He saw; he 
heard; he was convinced. Then he exclaimed, “My Lord 
and my God,” “The fullest confession thus hitherto made”; 
“Lord,” kyrios, signifies “one who possesses and disposes of 
another.” 

Jesus had accommodated Himself to the doubts of 
Thomas, so he reminded him and all of his temperament 
that “‘Because thou hast seen [me], thou hast believed.” 
Then was uttered, “This last and greatest of the Beatiudes 

. . the peculiar heritage of the later Church” (Westcot), 
“Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.” 
, Dr. A. B. Bruce in “The Training of the Twelve,” com- 
ments on Thomas’ absence from the former meeting to 
which Jesus appeared as follows, ‘In his melancholy humor 
he may simply have been indulging himself in the luxury 
of solitary sadness, just as some whose Christ is dead do 
now spend their Sabbaths at home or in rural solitudes, shun- 
ning the offensive cheerfulness or the drowsy dullness of 
social worship.” But if Thomas did stumble over the 
miraculous, surely he did not fall, much less, permit his 
rationalism to keep him down and away from enjoying the 
fellowship of faith. It was in this atmosphere of belief that 
he saw and hailed his Lord. 

Dr. Robert Dick Wilson, the celebrated Semitic scholar 
of Princeton, said once in the writer’s hearing that he had 
been a “Doubting Thomas” but determined to find out for 
himself. So he devoted himself to the study of Semitics, 
and then the records. He is today a staunch defender of 
the faith and, needless to say, a recognized authority on the 
Old Testament. 

Doubt is negative and willful: doubt is destructive; but 
the honest doubter may be, by his very doubts, stimulated 
to seek truth and light. As Tennyson wrote: 


360 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


“There lies more faith in honest doubt 
Believe me than in half the creeds.” 


Of course, the happiest moment in the life of Thomas was 
when he in ecstasy, said, “My Lord and my God.” That 
was “Eureka” to him. 


§ 148. The Appearance to the Seven Disciples by the 
Sea of Galilee. John 21: 1-24. 


We here have a striking account of one of the appear- 
ances of Christ to His disciples. Only seven were present 
and but five of these are named. It has been conjectured 
that these probably lived near the Sea of Galilee or Tiberias. 
If this is so, then Peter’s old haunts brought him back to 
his former habits and he proposes to go a-fishing. ‘The 
others accompany him, but they fish in vain all night. While 
the shadows were still hanging over the sands of the shore 
an unknown figure appears on the beach inquiring, “Chil- 
dern, have ye aught to eat?” To the answer “no,” he in- 
structs them to “‘cast the net on the right side of the boat.” 
The verse continues, “They cast therefore,’ and now they 
are not able to draw in for the multitude of fishes. Could 
this not have reminded the disciples of that other miraculous 
draught of fishes which they caught at the words of the 
Master as they had toiled all night and taken nothing (Luke 
5: 1-11). John, “that disciple whom Jesus loved,” was first 
to detect that the one on the shore was the Master. Simon 
Peter believed John, reverently, threw his fisherman’s coat 
around him and cast himself into the sea. This was in order 
that he, who was so accustomed to giving way to excess of 
feeling, might the sooner be in the presence of his Lord. 
But Peter’s six companions soon followed him, hauling in 
a net full of great fishes, a hundred fifty and three. Upon 
landing, the disciples were evidently surprised to find a fire 
with fish and bread placed there by other hands than their 
own. ‘Then at Jesus’ words Peter draws in the net contain- 
ing the large catch. With Him they broke their fast without 
asking, ““Who art thou?” ‘The Master distributes to them 
the food. | 


This was the third time that Jesus was manifest to His 


THE FORTY DAYS 361 


disciples. How unexpected must this all have been to the 
seven! Such an unheard of “catch”! Such a miraculous 
breakfast amid such rare fellowship! But the most illumi- 
nating part of this incident is Jesus’ dialogue with Peter 
following the meal. Jesus waited until the meal was over 
so as not to embarrass Peter. Jesus knew that Peter remem- 
bered his thrice denial of his Lord (Luke 22: 61-62). This 
denial on the part of Peter, the leader of the apostles, needed | 
to be reckoned for. We observe how Jesus uses the old 
name “Simon.” 

Peter’s rock characteristics were not yet in evidence. One 
has said that the expression, ‘Son of Jonas,” would remind 
Peter of his mean extraction. 

Both Mat. 26:69-75 and Luke 22: 54-62 record Peter’s 
threefold denial. Matthew relates that Peter used an oath 
and Luke records the Lord’s melting look. In the expres- 
sion, “Lovest thou me more than these,” there has been much 
conjecture as to what these refers to. Could it be his friends, 
the fishermen? Did he prefer Christ to his fellow crafts- 
men? He had just gone back to his fishing. Why did he 
do this? 

This suggestion overlaps that of his boats and nets and 
even his fishes. Could it be that Peter cares more for the 
profit and pleasure of his business than for the Master ? 
Did he with Paul say, “But what things were gains to me, 
those I counted loss for Christ’? (Phil. 3:7). 

Then there is a possibility that “these” refers to these 
other disciples and the question might be asked as to whether 
Peter loves Christ more than these others love Him. True 
Peter had said, “I will lay down my life for thy sake.” John 
13:37. Yet John had outdone him in faithfulness at the 
cross. Jno. 19:26. Peter the spokesman should have been 
there. Then by this question, ‘“Lovest thou me more than 
these,” Christ may have been reminding Peter that he had 
greater reasons for loving Him. Luke 7: 41-42. For had 
not Peter been forgiven much, and the woman who had 
come first to the empty sepulchre were bidden to “tell his 
disciples and Peter.” Mark 16:7. This including of Peter 
must have been re-assuring to him. 

It is easy to observe that we have the threefold question 


362 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


and the threefold reply. “Lovest thou me” came to Peter’s 
ears thrice. How this must have recalled any duties that 
had been left undone! How these questions must have pro- 
voked to desires of faithful service! How they must have 
encouraged Peter that it was possible for him to recover 
himself fully! 

Jesus twice uses the verb agapas. This word, says Trench, 
suggests a more reasoning attachment. To love in this sense 
calls for inward strength rather than an expression of feel- 
ing, in the words of Eidersheim. Peter in each of his re- 
plies uses the verb fileo which refers to a more instinctive 
love, which is rather of the feelings or natural affections 
and implies more passion. The Lord knows that Peter lacks 
no warmth of natural affection, especially at times. He 
would cut off Malcus’ ear for Jesus’ sake; he attempted to 
walk on the water to Jesus; he wept bitterly when Jesus 
looked at him after his denial; but the Master doubts 
whether Peter’s love would “give account of itself to itself.” 
—Trench. ‘The lesson is clear. Are we simply followers 
of Christ because of some beauty we have discovered in Him 
or some gift He has bestowed upon us? Do we imagine that 
some extravagant act, some complimentary epithet will dis- 
charge our obligation to Him, or are we giving to Him a love 
life? Is our love profuse today and passive tomorrow, or 
is it profound and persistent? Does our love need to be 
coaxed, primed, petted and pampered or is it like a mother’s, 
tried and true? 

Jesus in the last question adopts Peter’s own word for 
love, as though He wanted Peter to carefully consider if 
he could maintain that type of love. 

As we have suggested, the threefold question was evi- 
dently asked of Peter because of what he was. Jesus threw 
the searchlight thrice on his impulsive follower. It was a 
divine X-ray three times applied. It was a triplicate diag- 
nosis by the Heavenly Physician. So the examination was 
personal, pointed and doubtless painful. 

Peter’s impetuosity, his impulsiveness was pronounced. 
Peter had “personality.” Did not Jesus suggest, “Peter, 
if you love Me, there must be a lessening of this colorful 
personality and an increasing of what I want”? ‘That this 


THE FORTY DAYS 363 


was realized we learn from a study of his epistles. 1 Peter 
1:13, 2:13, 3:1, and the Golden Series Section, 2 Peter 1. 

Then Peter was prone to interfere in the affairs of others. 
This amounted to impertinence. He was concerned about 
“What shall this man do?” Surely the church is in need of 
samples of grace as well as ruling elders. Many a busy 
servant of the Lord could well say in the words of Solomon, 
“My own vineyard I have not kept.”’ The Lord does not so 
much want sycophants or professors in vocational guidance 
as He does soldiers, servants, examples. Then as verse 18 
suggests, Peter’s life was soon to be interrupted by death 
and. the Lord was recommissioning Peter for a successful 
ministry. He was expecting His servant to ripen and mellow 
so that when plucked he would be luscious and sweet to the 
Lord. 

When Peter answered the Lord’s interrogation, the reply 
always was “feed.’”’ Once the word “tend” was used, which 
includes the feeding. The lambs and the sheep must be 
cared for in the absence of the Good Shepherd and Jesus 
stresses the feeding of the sheep rather than the direction 
of the shepherds. 

Cook has said, “The foundation of the apostle was his 
love.” Faith worketh by love and the truth is spoken in 
love. Then Jesus in each instance uses the first person pos- 
sessive personal pronoun “My.” Thus he implies these are 
My sheep and in order to feed them you must love Me. 
Augustine says, “So love me, not thinking to feed your- 
selves but my sheep inasmuch as they are mine; since they 
are not yours seek my glory in them and not your power.” 


§ 149. The Appearance to the Eleven on a Mountain 
in Galilee. Mat. 28: 16-20; Mark 16: 15-18. 


Section 148 records how that Jesus again called His dis- 
ciples from their fishing. It appears evident that when the 
Shepherd had been smitten, the sheep scattered. The Apos- 
tolic group or College was broken up on that fateful night 
of betrayal and arrest. Peter “followed afar off” and denied 
his Lord with an oath. No mention is made of the apostles 
standing solidly together. True it is that they met in Jeru- 


364 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


salem together, behind closed doors, “‘for fear of the Jews” 
(Jno. 20:19). Their past associations and slumbering 
hopes kept them united (Jno. 20:26). But doubts filled 
their minds (Luke 24: 13-35). Jesus bade them ‘See. . . 
handle,” etc. (Luke 24:39, 40; Jno. 20:20). Were they 
not all “Doubting Thomases”? The Ten had advantage 
over him only in the fact that they were present at that 
initial appearance. Thomas though a little behind was as 
ready to believe on evidence. 

But regardless of their faith in Him, in His resurrection 
even, surely we can understand how the disciples were 
puzzled as to Christ’s program. Was it in this time of 
uncertainty, of wondering just what they should do, since 
Jesus had gone to the cross rather than to His crown, that 
Peter, ever restless and active, said, “I go a fishing’? At 
any rate six of his fellows said, ‘“We also come with thee.” 
But their fishing was futile. To His question, “Have ye 
aught to eat, Children?’ their answer was, “No.” But 
Jesus instructed them to so cast the net as to get “the multi- 
tude of fishes.” Then in the fellowship of plenty and suc- 
cess they dined together. 

After that memorable breakfast, when the risen Christ 
communed with His disciples, the Lord by a thrice uttered 
question sounded out Peter’s love for Himself. It was the 
Master versus “These” (Jno. 21:15). Then the “Great 
Shepherd of the sheep” is thinking of the flock. So He ad- 
vises, “Feed my lambs,’ “Tend my sheep,” “Feed my 
sheep.” Then He points to the martyr’s crown for His 
servant. 

Does this not all savor of a recommissioning; does it not 
sound like a recalling of the leader of the disciples? 

And since this was necessary, we understand how it could 
be said, “And when they saw him they worshipped: but 
some doubted” (Mat. 28:17). Doubt was the outcome of 
disappointment at the apparent miscarriage of Jesus’ plans 
for setting up a kingdom. 

So the Master appointed a mountain as a suitable meeting 
place with them, for a final authorization (Mat. 28:16). 
Geikie believes that this is the occasion when “He was seen ‘ 
of above five hundred brethren at once” (1 Cor. 15:6). 


THE FORTY DAYS 365 


This seems in keeping with “but some doubted,” since the 
eleven had all been convinced of His resurrection before 
this. (See Sections 146, 147, 148.) If this is not true then 
the apostles at that time were unstable beyond reason or 
imagination. 

But this appearance was accompanied by “The Great 
Commission,” called by the Duke of Wellington “The 
Church’s Marching Orders.” To their risen Lord had been 
given “all authority.”’ He, thus possessed of this authority, 
bade them “Go . . . and make disciples of all the nations,” 
etc. They were authorized to “Go,” act; they were to 
enroll as disciples by baptism; they were to teach their dis- 
ciples, Christ’s disciples, “to observe all things whatsoever 
I commanded” said the Master. But they were assured of 
His presence: “Lo, I am with you all the days,” etc. 

The important verb here, judging from the grammatical 
construction, is “make disciples.’ ‘This is the Imperative. 
He said in fact, in order to “make disciples’ of all the 
nations, ‘“‘Go ye into all the world’ (Mark 16:15); then 
discipleship is declared by a baptism which recognizes the 
Trinity—Jehovah, Christ the “only begotten God,” and the 
Holy Spirit; then these disciples, so made, are to be in- 
structed aright; and in such service [ am ever present. 

Mark emphasizes the fact that faith in the Gospel is the 
touchstone of salvation (16:16). He also states that 
miraculous power accompanies Gospel preaching. 


§ 150. Christ’s Final Appearance, and His Ascension. 
Mark 16: 19, 20; Luke 24: 44-53. 


Once again the eleven are in Jerusalem. Forty days have 
passed since His resurrection. He is in their midst. He 
reminds them of His being the fulfillment of the prophecies 
concerning Himself in Moses, the prophets and the psalms. 
He opens their minds to understand the Scriptures, and 
points out the importance of His passion and resurrection. 
He uges the preaching of repentance and remission of sins 
“unto all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.” Then He 
reminds them of their responsibility as witnesses. The 
promise of power is reiterated and the necessity of tarrying 
in Jerusalem urged. 


366 CHRIST IN THE FOUR GOSPELS 


From Bethany, whence He went to His Triumphal Entry 
into Jerusalem, the Master was about to take His departure 
from earth and His disciples. So He led them thither. 

There was the final visible lifting up of those nail-pierced 
hands and the farewell blessing. His last act was that of 
blessing for as He was so doing “He parted from them and 
was carried up into heaven.” They worshipped Him as He 
ascended and were hushed at His separation from them. 

He went to heaven itself; they back to Jerusalem “with 
great joy” despite His absence, where the temple’s signifi- 
cance was even more manifest. There they remained “‘bless- 
ing God.” He had gone to sit down at God’s right hand; 
they to tarry and then preach and witness by signs. They 
“carried on” in His stead. 


§ 151. The Conclusion of John’s Gospel. John 20: 30, 
31; John 21: 25. 


John selected from the many, many miracles of our Lord 
only those that would best serve his purpose. He was bent 
upon convincing those to whom he wrote “‘that Jesus is the 
Christ, the Son of God.” But John was not writing simply 
to convince the intellect, but to mightily move the will, warm 
the heart and so save the soul. “And that believing ye 
may have life in his name” expresses the blessed results of 
faith. 

So many “signs,” which Jesus did, are actually recorded 
that the wonder of His power causes us to marvel when we 
read, “Many other signs therefore did Jesus.” 

We are persuaded that John’s enthusiasm knew no bounds 
when he wrote, “If they should be written every one, I 
suppose that even the world itself would not contain the 
books that should be written.” 


INDEX 


Page 
Abomination of Desolation ., 301 
Adultery 
Woman taken in ,,........ 228 
REM OL Bae Soe liven: Cyt ee 
Alabaster box .....,.. Be ya ale 165 
HOT TS de BR A El el 41 
TAMIR INADS re ae ee occas 153 
Does S16 SE ME ea he a ede sae 151 
Ambition 
Of James and John ........ 276 
CTS mae ai sty fou ee oe 29 
Pasa ett to eect ca yn oad 78 
ARON CLUS Seon os oie cat 326 
Annunciation 
PPM AN Vode oss nie tent ace ay 21 
UORIDSEDU esc seve mck 23 
Anointing 
O58 BOS TRAP a Bear Deed 164 
FEU CS Et Aa a tg a 279 
PATE ASUin ey Sos eee ke 301 
Antiochus Epiphanes ........ 2 
Cp re Uy Onn a fi annie em 41 
PEDO AWIG TAL ct ety 72 
Appearings of Christ ........ 355 
homanwabsent}).03 366... 356 
Thomas present ........... 358 
reve ie foe loos eee cs te 360 
Toe leven. oo... ey ee ce 363 
Christ’s farewell ........:. 365 
Fabien] ES Th dt SO eee ge 41 
Haber | UES A ire ae 120 
UAT SRSOUISIIS EY hae. oak co ks cso b 41 
Jalym iit) SoS a Se a Bye ae 
Arrest Off JESUS. ewes esse ee 326 
PASGEUMDOLIN CS Nass hace tees cs 365 
PuPTIaEtIS BIT 0d os es vee 72 
Authority 
Christ’s challenged ........ 284 
DANUSTV Eee oer lke ce ek 4s 82 
CII OSUR Perri teaser cs 59 
DaGremmecurintss ae Soe: 84 
BGARMCCe Rs he 135 
Dee meranman uate au 70 
BESSA ME AY oe cei ec chat 117 
Benayalrarviesus 65.3 els 326 
Bibliolatry DCT Rian tate Goin 121 
“Di etek... Leva eked dice 217 


Page 

Birth 

OT esti or iets cna Lt ee 

Orfohnn ere ox Sats het 27 

Phe pecond, Oy an, Oey 81 
Blind 

Mien Sn roa tenon _ 197 

Man near Bethsaida ...,... 215 

Man near Jericho ...... Wea eed 
Breadth Ot iite toy Cece tok 206 
Brotherhood! Aan t eu aSt 105 
Burial oftfesug eri oh ain 342 
Caesar vAugustus/2ii ve cla. S, 
Caiaphas eae Ea 55, 268, 337 
Call 

OF Rot ia epee eaters ais 100 

Oli Matthew ene carne 113 
Cana ty tsruaes eres Oat eee 70 
Capernaum . 173) 95, 98, 100, 102 
Centurion’s Servant ......... 155 
Chiely Priests: Polo MENG es 228 

Ard \iuadas weve rebreane 307 
Childhood of Jesus ....... etgnyl ee 
Children 

Christ: blessing 42:23 Four. 273 
Choosing the Twelve ........ 132 
CICERO Re etre sore cia toon ta , 54 
Circumcision of Jesus — A alate 31 
Cleansing of Temple 

Babb 1 PerMN URE A IY oh Uae LD 77 

SECOUUSR Kin eu it eh oles lant 282 
Confession ia an 162 

Peterieh pot boc ie iden neo 
Cost.sCountineh a tare 261 
CLOssT Roi. aeak Deluna, ae 336 
Cpieeh Signs ee ec ome 337 

Christ, toretellssid. Jaga reins 276 
Cursing the Fig Tree ........ 282 
CVTULGE EN wise Matte Foterrt SaaS 72 
Death 

Christ foretells His ....218, 220 
Deralorue watery sooo eres 144 
Dedication, Feast of ........ 244 
Drestyeoi- Cnriset si ec ec ae 274 
Demoniacs 

Gada rere eanen eres Pea ty 

Boyer Seppe SP 220 


368 
Page 
Demons 1.64. siel basa Spi ie math {4 F4 
Dumb ieee aa eeials bee bebe 197 
Divorce Nice ve veseien ee 146272 
Dragnet, Parable of ......+++ 186 


Eating with Unwashed Hands 207 
Ebal, Mount 87 


eoeoe ewe aesnmerreerer ee 


Elisabeth 
Mary SViSit: tou ue soils 25 
Bemimaus as) ee vee Wace hie sia 355 
EOPH CA las) eoa ida Sanne , 268 
Fepicureann |) ]2'i, cis iee aieloinag 9) pt 162 
Epiphanes, Antiochus. veeus cua 
Eternal) Sime Gin s eee ae au 169 
Eeternals (200) View mann maieietnvaio 305 
BEI OS Wi seis eles as loreal a eee 145, 146 
EQbyChus isn sai heu cites ois aes 
Externalism : o. /2)4s.9'4 : 214, 294 
Faithfulness i... esc eee sees 198 
Fame of Christ PLCS As aL Al (RS 131 
Bastine,| cebu seesaw els 116, 154 
Feast 
OfiDedication ss seein sess 
re TRE eine one a ere 252, 282, 284 
Five Thousand Fed ......-... x 
Blicht into Beypt! paakaee ses 39 
FOrviveness ick Ue iuilgnce seine 221 
Fimeraliney ees caer. 158 
Gabriels ass outer ¢ hawes vieten 70 
Galilean Ministry -.........-: 95 
SCalilean: Fool tiiy cgsitee sa 40a 42 
Galileans 
Slain by Pilate ..... eee 4 251 
Galilee) ciin'sin nse bi o's 42, 70, 106 
Sea of, in storm ..:..062 6% » 189 
Final Departure from . Bate heed, 
Genealogies .....ecseasceu Bh V3 
Gentiles Seek Jesus .......... 296 
Gerizim,' - Mount) iiais Gi seas 87 
Gethsemane .::).celnwede seeds 320 
COB! aii Oe thy ote eek oleae ets 246 
Healing 
Peter’s Wife’s mother .... 104 
Exegesis of, Matt. 8:17 ... 105 
Man with withered hand .. 124 
Centurion’s servant ....155, 157 
Blind man near Bethsaida .. 215 
Man ‘born: blind jc oon cates 241 
Miracles of (ius. sedate 213 
Woman on Sabbath pee tic4 253 


Page 
Herod 
Rise Of o's ease ides oe see 4 
Works “oft: sicueamenes Naive: 
Cruelty sof (oo ieee 5 
Death Of Fin .Jcssebuwtew eur 40 
Tdtitnean 3.0). ib .ci so atereeemnate 85 
PASTAS Sivas nie casety are 160, 203, al 
Peast Ors ccekls eee ee 
Reply to warning against . "339 
FherOdtag vivicet as MAPA RA Sy 203 
Hibly Ghost! o..2. «ts neue ieee 223 
RECEIVE. s 3 5's ctc ais ce mie aie 227 
Tuguenots’ ()) ) Ga 5554 pn ea eee 181 
Piamility, on aicels sabe <a age eA | 
ISS ye tae Dake ay dite een 
Immortality. esse +s > ae ee Melee 158 
Thhirm> Man’ 2.50. aes «aan 117 
Jairus’ Daughter 
Raising OF tonne ee sis eke 194 
James, Ambition of ......... 276 
Janni, Rabbi ........+.eeeees Ad 
Jericho . 
Blind man near ‘sis sense 277 
Jerusalem, Destruction OF eayoeeo 
Jese, Rabbi s...57004.0 te eee 43 
John 
Ambition} of vo. easne ueenen 276 
Goes to “Tomb Sei 351 
John, the Baptist 
Birth promised ........-+. 17 
Ministry of ...- 2s syeame 53, 121 
‘Testimony’ Of: 2 ceee es aannee 86 
Disciplés °6f Sons ees 116 
Last Message of .......... 160 
Jésus’ estimate of ........- 162 
Death ote. tsaen (lon Gee 
John’s ‘Prologue a.siseesiees 9 
Jonah cee Ca yew eee ee ace 171 
Joseph 
Of Aftimathea’ ..2.ipateeene 81 
Jesus’ foster-father ........ aaa 
Josepliuis A.A ag ie hk cee 
Judaism’). 4 sta) c'nlhe wets Cee 232 
Judas 
Conspirés | awl iveqeuennes 307 
udéd  “/,'Sds 52s se one 42 
Judgment’... ie scat ien 260 
Kethubah’ i ic) Vines ae 71 
Kindred of Christ, True .... 172 
Kingdom 
Coniinig of ‘i!. seis aan 269 
OR oe ye as oie ae 102 
Kor bah 5/25 chee steer 209 


INDEX 


Page 
Lean), OF. Godta. sive cancels oss 
Lazarus 
Paraple vi tan era vwanice ci we 264 
PRAISING (Oba oslat lad ves dant 265 
Teaver Raranleiiart asc ea 0 Loe 
Lepers 
shan LES (tye SESE Sp ee 268 
RGR cig a iatiole abate te 108 
Light of the World Palehel std arate 230 
Me es van SAS Wolo ed 217 
ROCCE isa cis alata clini ha ayes sy9 «9 14 
His preface Se RP BRE A 13 
MTOR ur, rs sad deiaee cee.s oom 8 102 
MR ee ye ees emdate & 43 
DEECCANCES 0 oes \ cecde se wlewere Re AN 
PUSS aL aeeeh aie oath obi des apes 244 
Magdalene, Mary ........ 168, 169 
Pre COI fk ike wea ct eo ee 350 
PALME a alae st ¢ pine ciel riey, we 
Mary 
Of Bethany ....<h.«-: 239, 279 
Mother of Lord ....0.4..0 21 
DU AURIAEE oc heals sical ons twas 70 
Blaha ete ck cla ee eee 6 239 
WEATOrial Stith ino ved ah alia ste 6 98's 214 
BE eGSIANG Gee oat ow clinicians, on aeracs 225 
MATOIAGI Ysa ck he weeks eee 70 
Miarcles 
ee VIE SCG Sct otis Ue v4 ois 69 
Natural with Christ ....... 80 
Not to His liking ......... 106 
Pifesirage. LOU.) 4%. + uss «0 161 
SS VIEALIICTIC NG's 6 vcs» o'0-0 0 264 
IVP ISN IA We citcet stil so. , 122, 207, 208 
DUES VWAIGOW Soc. cece sds ses 
Mustard Seed 
Petar) CliaG v.05, «10's 6 6's-010's 182 
Pere VTE TG Pp eghoy Sa Sea 68 
Deen ete Wt dae ics soso «cee 42 
PP RPAPER Rye ss cc cc. clne cyedes 70 
BROIOCEIOM TU Te esis a +s «yt see 198 
OOOO ALM she seas aic's e's, « 42 
Highteen years at ......... 48 
Nazarites 
eT CORIYO! OL owes wee ies 5 19 
Dee NOV e cals oly ace beans 275 
PIRRCOT IIS ast cites da ee fs 72 
Nicodemus 
SEN) ats (Oc Nae A ORM aR Dy BS 43 
Peetimate Ge eu, cates ac bale wat BO 
WIGTERSERG Tiras. a nd clire des 228 
ININOUEII Soe to in Pak cle se} as 171 
eg oii ate hd re Oe 171 


Ninevites 
24 


369 
Page 
Nobleman’s Son)... 24055 95 
Nonresistance 
Applied to individuals ..... 148 
Example of—Thurgood ... 150 
Ghathion enue nCy weve cleeh ie 146 
Opportunist 
Palate eee a Waele. oh aie ata e whole 328 
Ordinances 


Their binding character .... 208 


Papini 
Description of temple scene 78 
Description of Christ, the 


CPAVCIEN) ec ncd eooua a et te 99 
Description of “Four” 101 
PATADIESI cule need sean wenies 173 
ROWER Milne alt oad culate 175 
(CATCH RAI oy eC Une tad itartes 177 
Mustard! Seeds. decet as seme 182 
TCA VEIN re thes ce tedineles 182 
Eli TPeaSurey cscs uaetoela s 184 
Bg Posh ost: vk Wap penpe ee ae Dap Sabai 185 
RPaSHeR Tet Poe tes ae heer 186 
‘Three: 6f) Grace vo s).)s ae ages « 261 
Prodigal’ Sonics seeer) cen) 261 
Posts Sheep sea os au leis 261 
TOsth Goins acre o near tees 261 
Of Unjust Steward ....... 263 
Rich Man and Lazarus .... 263 
Ford’ susecGtice ss. sr atacge © 298 
Paralytic 
Borner ot (fours ce sae fees cet 110 
Passover 
Boy Jesus ate scceetaegs 46 
Time of Feast urs cess 222 
Deast sense pra eae an aes 309 
Pearl) Parable of 4.) 2. ss saa 185 
Pentecost 
One of three great feasts .. 46 
THe OL ane t eh d a emacs 222 
Perfect 
Meaning Of \edscsedesidecaes 152 
Peters Une Bois eictelatg ate 215, 218, 220 
His’ Confession ......2...% 215 
Goesetor LOmp beussan ose 351 
Pharisees 
Cippase. Jestiss idvieske os cee 86 
Bauntijesusiecacecs a ceeae: 115 
Wasting Oto tucecdes sree san oe 117 
Eexactions: off vendecceets 122, 144 
FERINGCTOR eck iss cose a boas 1 
SPitnities eiaece ss aoe dba ee ete 215 
Prerudiced’) iu cs adene eaeet 
WONTEMOELOL : oy a six wststes 228, 229 


370 
Page 
Blind iourdes Wonca valves 243 
Not ‘shepherds yc Gute tee 243 
Discourse azwainst Mose Ul 248 
Solicitous of Christ ........ 257 
Representedwye vie sess t 263 
Desperation: OF) \st.'.'./iea's a's os 268 
Hounding Jesus... 00)... 269 
Discourse at table of ...... 259 
And i kpblican oe ioe hain 271 
Woes against iui ooy ite 290, 293 
Philo nage iis ps teenee le dik ety a 10 
WE Dy seeeiniata ess oe aM ee eae 68 
Phylacteries \ yew deem wens vc 291 
Palate WW kccee seinem tan 327, 328 
Le WILE Ret eng as 329 
Packing Grameinoie wc 122 
Prayer 
BAYIVALE Wh tie ee wale as igh bie! 
VEG Corin GE: TAMURA AGL HRSA pil 222 
DISCOUTSE OL edo ome wis nudes 247 
Titer GeSsory nie atic marie 318 
Preacher nin noe vay atiin eins 97 
Presentation ees ued wee wane 5A 
Prologue 
OF John's (Gospel ee 9 
PUplitan sy ue sews to Mane eas 113 
Pharisees ae 271 
“Queen of the South” ....... 171 
Question, Christ’s unanswerable 289 
Rabbis 
Contrasted with Christ .... 109 
Influence oni aa sue tee 110 
Conservatism ¥oricced. esac 112 
GASHistEy VOL ete ecu cee kak 146 
ATUSTOMS OT et en Lag 164 
Rabbinism apiece ao 115, 180, a 
IRADIUME Hy bia vin n eaicletde Ralect 
Rejection at Nazareth a0) “56 
ROUT IGG i Mea Dat ee lva at alate 217 
Renan er cn wae ie 78 
Resurrection 
POretond.) on Ouse 218, 220 
Mornin or ce i eho 349 
INetain Mi Oane) tale ds he eae 217 
Return to: Nazareth 033,75. sib 39 
Rich: Mant oscil. sue ad 264 
Young ruler Ae ey ei 274 
Sabbath 
Woman healed on ......... 253 
Sabbath-keeping 
exactions (7 on ei the eee ae 119 


INDEX 


Page 

Two evident objects ...... 122 
Sadducees 

Behett of) cso ka eee 215 
Salome iron iii. ste CORO nae 41 
Saliitations: cio... coe beeen 292 
Satnaritan, (x00 |... aces 238 
SAMAP IPAM heals sayehaic te tay Marae 87 
Sanheédrists (is wcauee ctw 328 
Sanctification 

Beimg “perfect” 2.0.0... 152 
Satan We 6 cies te edoretautin, wae 178 
Saved, Hewiiuhicusve vole arose 256 
Security of saints .6.0.....0. 245 
SOME hitonntetl’s ttaledile Gechslels ancien 54 
Septsagint otek yee oene ae 1 
Sepulchres, White .......... 294 

Watch ate icisiiiaienrecclee more 344 
Sermon on Mount .......... 133 
Servant 

‘Ot! Jehovah” es2s2eerpece 131 
Seventy 

Mission: OF sine e bdo emseeee 238 
Shekel in Fish’s Mouth ...... 220 
Shepherds 

At. Jesus birth iuimeeeeies 29 

“The Good Shepherd” ..... 243 
Shinemy aw aaa ae ee 159 
Sifting ib wey ieee eee ee ce Ur 
Sign from Heaven .......... 214 
Sign of His Coming ........ 303 
Simon 

The: Phariseenu 5. tise ee 164 


Simpson, A. B. 
His appreciation of epg) oo l4 
His tradition on Babel .... 38 


Ay Right’ 9, Geek. eee 102 
Sin 

Kternaly ities. See 169 

Unpardonablés (soe eee 169 
Socrates 

Greatness: .n0 a ee ae 42 

And: Sophiststii¥. 7004 on 97 
Soldiers 4: . AG eee 329 
Son lof! Mange ass ee 132 
Sophists ii ae ee 97 
Sower, Parable of .......... 175 
Supper, Least it,’ bce eee 309 
Synagorne (ia eee 96, 253 
Syrophcenician Woman ...... 213 
Tabernacles, Feast ...46, 222, 227 
Tacitus... oe sads cen cteeee 54 
‘Talmud’ io. oes 122, 134 
‘Lares, . Parable: of) cevisa rio 177 
‘Laxation., oct 05 Se Sete ee 113 


INDEX 371 
Page Page 
pgpaceesat OL NOt: cites es we QRS Wi VADEES tits ciela's win’ sins ste RL eaieee 295 
Temple VW ISiGutCi dL CITI DLGu n'a nie a! vc via ela's 46 
Wortider Of). 03.545 3s  Fpapde 299 
Presentation in) 5.4% 64 6s 32 Walking on the Water ...... 204 
First Cleansing of ......... 77 Watch at Sepulchre ......... 344 
Temptation Reporti.0L sey sien nie pereeen 354 
GIES POSTS IAS eile clas ates o's 60 Wedding, Jewish ............ 70 
Testimony Wesley oi Ohin 40 te sole oe ote 102 
OMNIS Sib a enol hae cova es ESA HILCHeLd on a's eiz'sw ans oes be 102 
PROC DEUS sag essicsae clyde oe 15) oiWidow's eM ites) s Se. vee tee 295 
Thurgood, Rev. Charles ..... 150 Widow’s Son Raised ....... . 158 
ELMS ee irs one Vwcd eens Goia''sle SS MAW tlliatiGey OPEL. 5. osike ism eles 181 
Tithing Wine, Water made .......... 69 
PETAL IBOOE she y ati en's w'viularay sc WV ise netiess ieee a slaiskgaie usr 36 
Traditionalism ...... 207, 226, 243 Withered Hand .........++-. 124 
Transfiguration, The ........ Wices of Jesus). wove vetows 290, 293 
Treasure, Hid Woman of Samaria ......... 87 
Parapler Of) iss easel a cost oe PARE AV GIO He SOUS bed od aay a tenes 9 
‘Tripulation, Great vv's <2 6s sins «'s 301 World of NOMITS Gay (on as te 2 8 RS 
PEARHUIDE lc a asls's 014 « hicly adhe oo 288 MinWiorid: PndsOte satya cole s enn 298 
Triumphal Entry aye ae tkteta 280 Ta WiVclitle: bute r oie ae ga cstee « 102 
Twelve 
Mission of the ...........- 201 Zacchzus 
Wisitiitoi tice fsce eae) eas wals 
SIRs em cool dv Sratnid ath waisted 307 sr Zarephiathe se eo yuile ve velo a 98 


Index of Passages of Scripture 


Passage MATTHEW Page Passage Page 
Peeled 7ieg sere ee eee 16:16: 1512) Da eee 214 
LS 225.4 ieee: Se ae eee 23 13-20 835. ise cald eee 215 
PAS OS VAIS ie a Rah teat Sel (yoy PaO 22880 ee ote Sees ee 218 
13-23 see be bs ve Seas wee 39 UT SISIS ee a 219 
D3 Vor eiads Coeo ek 42 1h a | es ge hee ag FL > 220 
De Wed S Bat BOE aa ee ome ee 53 22, 25 CEL EEE ee 220 
LST ee PO A ee 59 24227, aera eccn teen ee 220 
Ae Pid cep pel ayo ae OD 1859635: 4' i ae ae 221 
| RP anes SUN ima Ue he: 86.0919 1) 9 CS ee 237 
IPC IS16) 7a es cue tes 95 Bel? Soe eee 271 
[SS oe Ceri rr yr re kan ery jhe 98 15215 eis ate ce 273 
Za Aw eu Ck ce pd -. 106 16-3033. ovo. See 274 
A SAE PSH Wee fi se AOL 520 Tn 16 tc er 274 
Be dR i sae eye ee as 133 17219: op Se a ee 276 
Gr esqee ee as ap hs oe mee 8 20-28. oe eee 276 
DISCO Ewe Saito d swat 133 29-34: Vs by Roe A 277 
ao) Oe NA pr aaa ely Wie kas a 106) 202161 ds et eG ae eee 
al Ul ss ake ee slain 155 12-175. a ko ohn eee 282 
1 BS ek ele, Ak OL BASEN op Bi) 102 1819-22. eS eee 282 
UG eats eiclaltee’ Palate ne 189, 237 20-22 4.5 he er 284 
it i A RUBE a Rare La 237 23-27 hs a Se ee 284 
FS IA Me AO DS Bone SPUN LAI | 189 ZO-AG) 5. 6. Sdn tha 285 
ZO Se atalino alee Vee mee 192 11522: 1-149, 70 285 
Gis ERS ane ee ito hae 110 15-40 3 eee 287 
1G Or ok Tie ee ht ah te 133 41-46 2. nn den eee 289 
TA 17a a one aren 116. ).23°1-39. 22 ee 290 
IS-ZO MA ee cee cocnemes 194° 124: 1-51557), 2 eee 298 
Tait a Cen aht SONSE anos 197 2521-460 35.2) ee 298 
Banh SR i ew irae eae ZO 262.1,:2 ie Ot 298 
f MIO“ SG coon Slee Waa enns 201 1-5) e vccene eee ee 307 
LORIAZ reek OR Gane 201 6-13) i ie eee 279 
Ee RARE MLS We rghit IME 132 14-16 on ivi ee 307 
We baa Ae, Mie aay ghee ay AGL 201 17-30.) 20 ee 309 
ey Ree OT Reyna 160 31-35 is a ae hae ee 314 
LAAs A A a EP a RA WY Pn 122 36-46 oo iva cee ee 320 
On14 eee eit et aae cae eee 124 A/-56 s\scnoton: ce ele ee 326 
| EY 4 Yl esl p aioe GPR RR A A 131 57-15 vce ae 326 
DAS IIe he bine Usha te iemae 16902721210 Sos ee 326 
Le gd DRA aye ge LAS, OM i ile 172 12632 on See 327 
ESL talk cares cork oleic as eee 173 32-56 ee ciel te eee 336 
nS ERE EOP U ER oe BEB Wier oh 198 S761 ees aus eee 342 
| Fe Bal) Ett Vale Sanaa ROW ele MS hy SP de BS 202 62-66... So eee 344 
LB om Vie yy NE OAS Ap 203 2831-10 ne 349 
ZARA eee ee Lak vawuameone 204 11-15 ican tdesuel eee 354 
| Ta Rees | TR ae Sr eg a onl Ue ua 207 16-20 hss 4 oe eee 363 
Blas Wer cea tee 213 
OBA ad st Oe Uri 213 Mark 
8 Pe Raabe toa peatgene er 214 1: 1-8 oo kw cee eae 53 | 
tT ns BOY ie Sete 214 O-17 |5y s wneud d pees ae 


INDEX 373 


Passage Page Passage Page 
Tie S aerate coe ai Olkamacl ae SO reye yh ia bea 298 
PASO Cece terse. ty. UTE gn IE AR ERE 307 
ERG CED Th a i 95 CL pd pee ORLA 279 
LUV EPAU IY gop ple ny ne a 100 LOS UAipatstees'y ele pate niente 307 
Bi iiemane eC ge Ce 102 CALA EES EES OS 309 
Te be nah aa 106 71) bith NU Eh 314 
EO each ie aa 110 SEPAZ UNS RIN Ne iay, ts Rteg 5S 320 
Rg i mai le Nis Aaa 113 A TRE AM gd 326 
Lee) ChAT IE CC aa 116 SREY ye a ai I 326 
Cheese Mey fo 1220) TSE 20 a) uh ec eannn  e 327 
Te Ls oy aaa a ame 124 FAWN he MO AR ead SE ae? 336 
RI Oe Ee AE See 131 VA ANTS a aE 342 
13-19 Reese ia, CON 132 16: 1-1 l Las aL Par ri: 349 
OAR Ra Gt WE ak 9 LD GS peat ent pale a 
SY oan RT pire aed 172 LS! RV SN aT aay 356 
ree ea ne nena 173 TSLIS ts een Sry hy aad 363 
oe VAR AT OIA rape NaRR ME 189 SEI ie Wea CaS A 365 
1A A SR Se GL 192 
SEs Sea ae aa Loe, A: ip 
Be eos aL paerca MMe aN aaa IS 17 
PNT Pe oe 201 Boe G 
2S a ES eR ea 202 Sie ae A enn he ae 
BOsfO WUT in wate ci | aks 203 eae Saya A ERE dy a 
47-56 BOA Tica Uh eed. 204 Paale Oe PERC ae a A: 
BED Sve yT is, oh 213 ae ra orca a a 
CS NLA eg 213 Donnan enter a 
12 aoc) PA Aa 214 Coan acts se se aciaited dela 
10-21 214 39, 40 eC eoeocerereereeessese 42 
EOD Gr Raa ee ALSO ORO Ne LOR ae 
eZ eih acea Ka 215 3169 43 
7 SEN pra ae FAY) Mec Sica tee cece se 63 
OS EAE A a oe ZT 221 (B4a le grees 59 
2s ZIMA (one Mai 6p 
Th Sivigts uth ae Sa 220 14. 15 95 
eat SAS Sa a 220 Dr eos r agen dack 
each oH 16S 96 
EO OOS SOE OARS Le is se ake cue ype 98 
POM oe oes av alee 237 ST a ora Noire eure 102 
at ee 27 Leos 1d Teen ee Ae 106 
13-16 0. ee eee eee eeee eee 273 TA Oe a ore aa 106 
eS) SO ee 274 TZ EA UES Ae 110 
32-34 ..... SAS ERE aay 276 VARGA Lad ee Nee | 113 
S545 eee kee cee eeenee 276 Ret Sse Ain ey a 116 
5 CITIES TTR Oren eel kG he Mh 122 
TALE Rs sive sntan anon esses e's - 280 STN EL Arte crate para Ok 124 
Bee Reet ph eins ae xia aie dyes s 282 |S SE Ph iia le a nS, 132 
AOS APA Aa ae 282 LA CAA ei oe hee Sk eae Te 131 
ASS I 284 ZAG IRS OA 1 CTs 133 
ES SAIS ORAS RP P44 OND RAVEN Ui a ap aU RRR Me 155 
(EL ES a 285 11-17 Oe nS San 158 
BS SD 287 RCE aeruginosa 160 
POPE eos econ se ha 289 BA SOs wee ha MCE 164 
SMa eral ee Ate ZOO SG Ne = Mas ARCs Vou hee oe Se 167 


Passage Page Passage Page 
WAZ alewoer a vee cess PSS Te Solas og Usb ove Need Oe 327 
22-295 54 SUL REL ROLE UPN wet 189 ZO-AGN ES esi Pea a ays i 336 
ZO-SD US ae eee Le bae a leks 192 S0e56al so. eee eee eee 342 
AQSG27 s SHSEPIIT Ee 194 SODA DEES oh is lca eee 349 

MS DY AGU ep n et et bik Ay en Ga 201 2241-12, eluent ee 349 
FO pal bs CL EY ee ee 202 1Lo-S5iiui5 os hs Soe kee eee 355 
LOT 7rd iia Was ee tne 203 SAAB 00) os kids buat pemes 356 
fi PES MIEN Ne Net ud fata a FY, BS GR PaPVer re Wig ApS 0 365 
DELIV EEE Ue cut elas ele a ete 
Di sein g ei hi ke eeu a 219i Seite Mets g 
37-43a Fea slevetatelelc. a) atevers eters 220 19-28 ene tee Ba Sian Be ibs 65 
4Sb-4b i a eater hes Doge Ze0 Mi tan ene ed «nay Canteens eee Se 

ZIB4 io hkl, o bergid etienelee ame 66 
46-50 or Se Ree eas eee 221 
i ee ee Pa ee nets 67 
SLBA eay Er Meee eee 237 5 
ASO) Sian eed eae 68 
Lee ia sib ia ad dealer 238 2:1-11 69 
SORT Als EADCS UN Sie Panam ED 238 SDA ol Sa Se ae eee 
BAAR Ces 239: SN ibys TERS es ae 
PRLS Maree RE oiole aieinin ole bie Sie eg 247 PEROT Wd. a 79 
D484 foo wcic'ein po clge va nyse CAR nS eA ia have obee a nee 84 
PPa cera de eeeudeueunsee 248 Z513O 0 2c Fie we ale ee 86 
Pe NERS: hata Lik a: SWUNG igre areal tO 251 1 BS ERR aan PERE Ree fe % 86 
Lage Leese wa atie oo ai tie giacaus ees 253 4-26). uv ea Lobe eee 87 
Za be as anetneclaccs Met 256 27-42 6 cee nes Co. Ge eee 90 
6 a LP eee ren Takaka kee 257 ASA: |, 2 nde yay cine 95 
1 FOE en NIRS bea esl Stas BL 259 46-540 fous viele aeueeeee 95 
FAST SPIE RB DRO EC Rn oy: [ MURINE 261 5147 reve aa Re ee 117 
LSAT Mee Cala etd nome 261 Gt 1-15 45 Pea eee 203 
USL tuis Saw caves vc Oe Mee 263 16-2150 AG ae eee 204 
1 LO eae Sa io ane ce 265 B27 Le SS iareiece ae eae 206 
De ear ee tra) Pune GLa sae 268 Ai 1-52) 2h eee 
ZA OL Suk Vici silva stein 269 OS a ea i ree eee ee eee 228 
1S. RAD e RRC RTE OS 4 eG 269 Be te ote eee ee 
OR SN ot te acceler 271 12-30) ee oe eee 230 
DS eL AiuI aa eat ae ee els 273 315 Te Pee Oe 233 
IBM ee cae ume ola eran 274 921041 eon eee 241 
i Ps ST ab eset ay 600105 1-200 ea a ee 243 
Sora outset G hes mite wou 277 2EAZ OS eb Se 244 
Be Otcce te eeontenta es aa ie 278) TL edge oer tO oe ee 265 
1 Bs SWE a ae Lt nae bc 278 47-54) Po Oe eee 268 
FF ETE NOAH APF tina OD Hag) 280 5557) cha et eee 279 
ADAGE Dicuitt dads cele 282) U2 Teh ohare 279 
Ley a aes Ren eos 284 12-19) chai eles CO eee 280 
Or 7a a cuales Ue 285 20-36): SE eee 296 
CAD es aie NT) Bets S740 oe eee 297 
PL eRe uh das bea ey wae 200) 813 1-300 2 ay ee 309 
Ae ee er cc. alee eee 290 31-38! SEs os Sh ee 314 
Cramer Cid eleanor 295) 142 Ts31 pc ois bee eee 314 
NRT ae Sanh ar tee 298 T5e 1-27 oe deoee ata eee 314 
1 ate pod ee emai DUM Sov 307. 1691-3355 3s {2 ae 314 
PaMV Pee cs y kid ee Fest et 500) OV 1-264 en HA ee 318 
Rete ERR eh ote Cre 4 ae 314 -TS8's1-1l ie AA int eee 326 
BORIC cs Cin en emake oie 320 12-24 ccievc uslten eee Ae 326 
ro PAR CA i MANO, od op Alsat CY? 326 AD) >, ivinidler Salata ate tee oes 327 


INDEX 375 


Passage Page Passage Page 
Ree shih oa inte ean ts « SOOM we Se 2O-2O ar ed ta mi ee 358 
Me ah tae ie Ua ae eles « « 342 UM OR Dey anierte tie wlbhe ele 366 
GRC yn katy ee a Reeiee ee vie ss SUD ia eee boy onnaiic as Aare leg Delle 360 
Besa Whee slo's Steet ea aie v's s 356 366 


eoeeceoereereereere sees est eoeeee 

















Wa 
yt 
hI ay 
Ka oe 
Me Ug: 
va Eb Owe 











Date Due 

































BS2420 .C115 
Christ in the four Gospels, 


Princeton Theological Seminary—Speer Library 


UNO UN 


1 1012 00013 004 





